Archive for Technology – Page 2

DeLaval Virtual Farm Tour

1377631_753769361301648_1807388651_n[1]We invite you to take a virtual tour of a fully automated free flow Canadian barn. This robotic facility uses cutting-edge technology to optimize production. CLICK THE LINK HERE and use the map in the lower left corner to see an overview of the barn. Controls in the lower left corner can be used to navigate the barn.

Voluntary robotic milking is an exciting proposition when considering the benefits, but can fall short of expectations if the facility is not properly planned. Like any building needs a strong and organized structure, planning a VMS facility requires proper planning to ensure cow comfort, cow flow, flexibility, expandability and sustainability.

Please note the tour is intended to assist you with the planning and design of a robotic milking facility by visually demonstrating features we have found to work well. A successful robotic milking operation requires sound farm and herd management practices by dairy producers who are willing to work with technology and manage change effectively. You are encouraged to work with a qualified architect and/or contractor in consultation with your veterinarian when designing your robotic milking facility.

Gene Editing – Is It The End of Dairy Breeding?

For years, dairy farmers around the world have worked hard at developing and breeding a more desirable higher producing dairy cow.  Now with the rapid developments in understanding the genomic structure and, even more recently gene editing, this process may become obsolete.  Gene editing technology can accomplish immediately what would take the dairy breeding world 50 years.

First let’s get a couple points about gene editing clear.  We are not talking about Frankenstein’s monster or transgenics, such as sheep that have mouse genes to grow wool faster, or goats that have spider genes making it possible for them to produce silk.  Transgenetic experiments have been around for years and have never actually made it off the research farms.  Consumer backlash and regulatory constraints to transgenetics have been tremendous deterrents. quoBounty Technologies, the company that made a fast growing transgenetic salmon, has spent 16 years and $70 million trying to get the fish cleared with regulators.  Three years ago, after giving up hope of convincing regulators, the University of Guelph euthanized its herd of “enviropigs”, engineered with an E. coli gene, which meant they pooped less phosphorus.

Gene editing is different in that, instead of introducing traits from other species, gene editing is about using genes that already exist.  An animal could be edited to possess the best traits their species has to offer. It may sound like just a slight change but from a consumer and a regulatory perception it could be significantly different.

We are not talking about fish that glow in the dark. We are talking about cows that are born polled, or  Traits such as A2 Milk. Gene editing allows us to take the traits that already exist within a species and introduce them into the bloodlines that possess the most other desirable traits.  This currently falls under a regulatory loophole.  The FDA in the US current regulations on genetically engineered animals, issued in 2009, didn’t anticipate gene editing and does not cover it.

As we as an industry are gaining greater understanding of dairy cattle breeding at a genomic level, the question of being able to edit that data and paste the data we like from one genome to another is becoming a  reality.  With the knowledge of exactly what snippets produce the highest milk production or the most desired mammary systems, gene editing would allow us to marry those genetics into on animal faster than ever before.

Current genomic testing has shown us that a “Supercow” constructed from the best haplotypes in the Holstein population would have an EBV (NM$) of $6745.  This is more than 5794 points higher than the current #1 NM$ sire Seagull-Bay Charismatic (951 NM$).  At the present rate of genetic progress ($74 NM$ per year), it will take us 80 years to achieve the super genomic cow.  With gene editing, that process could be cut down to 4 or 5 years!

Gene editing is a significantly faster and more precise method of genetic advancement than any other approach in the world today.  While you may think this process is many years down the road, some major companies are already investing in it.  One such case is Genus, the parent company to ABS Global.  They have been funding some research by a business called Recombinetics and the research of Scott Fahrenkug.  Recombinetics has been using a gene editing process called TALENs to snip segments of DNA representing undesirable traits such as horns and add other traits such as heat tolerance or higher production.

With these companies investing heavily into new technology, it raises the question of who owns the rights to the resulting information and products.   Genomic testing showed us the advantage of an early access to information. Some had significant advantages in that scenario. Just think about what exclusive access to edited gene animals will have if it means a  seven times greater genetic improvement over current options.  If you think a 10% advantage is a game changer (aka the approximate advantage to early genomic information) think about what a 700% advantage would mean.  Technologies like IVF and sexed semen have shown us the advantage that companies that own the patents on these technologies have.

With such significant advantage in the potential of the resulting animals, there really is no question that these genetics will be embraced by the dairy industry.  One need only look at the corn and seed industries for examples.  Approximately 80% of the world’s soy and cotton production is GMO.  Corn currently stands at 35% and significantly higher (approx. 80%) in developed production countries that allow the us of GMO products.  This mass adoption of GMO technology, despite consumer backlash, demonstrates that with significant improvements, GMO products are here to stay.

Bullvine Bottom Line

In 50 years the world population will require 100% more food and 70% of this food must come from efficiency-improving technology.  Unless someone discovers how to dairy on the moon, we are going to have to become significantly more efficient in our milk production methods.  Gene editing offers the potential to meet this demands.  Current genetic advancement rates will be hard pressed to meet in 50 years what gene editing can offer in under ten years’ time.  Sure a small number of very vocal consumers will be opposed to gene editing, but the masses want cheap, safe milk.  Gene editing, since it is not transgenics, offers this possibility.  This raises the question, “Are the dairy breeders of the future actually scientists sitting in labs?”

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

World First For Parlour Automation Unveiled In Germany

Louise Hartley reports from Hannover on what is dubbed a ‘game changer’ in miking automation.

With an individual robot arm at every stall, GEA Technology launched the world’s first fully automatic external rotary parlour in Germany last week.
Called the DairyProQ and with four prototypes currently running in Germany and two in Canada, the system was described was a ‘game changer’ in dairy automation by GEA’s vice-president of large project sales, Steve Pretz.
He said: “Farmers have an increasing number of things to look after on-farm and automation will help them cope with these challenges.
“Our customers are not only seeking more efficient and profitable businesses, but young people coming in to agriculture want to ‘work to live, not live to work’. Dairy farms need to be
attractive to young people and automation is key in that.”
Press from around the world gathered in Teichroda, south east Germany to see the 40-point system, which was installed on farm in June last year.

MILKING

Milking

Milking 200 cows per hour and needing one member of staff to milk, the herd of 400 Holsteins could be milked in just two hours.
The system was installed by father and son Eckehard and Stefan Blottner, who farm 1,740 hectares (4,300 acres) with pigs, beef, geese, ducks and deer as well as the milking herd in their co-operative farming enterprise Teichel e.G. Agricultural Cooperative.
On explaining why he made the investment, son Stefan Blottner, sited lesser dependence on a labour, consistency in the milking procedure and improved efficiency as the key drivers.
Previously running a five-a-side auto tandem which required two people to milk, he said: “For herds milking 400 cows or more I believe this the future. We need to keep growing – as individual farms produce more milk, others will have to make less and smaller farms will disappear.”
Dr Blottner said they wanted to move from milking two to three times per day but did not want to spend money paying good staff to milk all day long. At three daily milkings, the parlour runs for six hours per day and requires one person to watch the robots and assist with any cows which need to be manually attached and another bringing cows in to the collecting yard – the aim is to have one person doing both.
“Put simply, we can now grow the herd without diluting the co-operative’s workforce, a group of highly skilled people we have worked hard to put together.”
Consistency

Consistency of milking was also a big appeal for the father and son duo. “For a cow, the best thing we can provide is a consistent milking procedure and the DairyProQ can milk cows more consistently and accurately than any workforce,” said Dr Blottner.
Cows are brought into the collecting yard and enter the rotary as normal. Each robotic arm sits in a stainless steel box within each stall divider. Teats are cleaned, dried, fore-milk stripped and post-dipped in the liner. Pre-dipping can also be applied.
“Efficacy of milking is not dependant on staff. Every cow is stimulated properly for a fast milk let down and teats are accurately dipped and performance is never variable.
“It is not about robotics – it is about investing in automation to help you do a better job.”
Since the herd has moved to three-times-a-day milking, yields have increased from an average of 28kg per cow per day to 33kg, with the highest yielding group hitting 42kg.
Somatic cell count has also seen a positive reduction, from 260,000-90,000, which could also be due to cows being housed in a new building with a better environment.
The system also claims to have a unique service system. If a robot breaks down the stall can be blocked off, leaving the remaining 39 robots to continue milking. The stainless steel unit is taken off and left in a small service room contained within the parlour building ready to be fixed in normal working hours.
When probed on cost, GEA representatives said ‘each robotic point costs significantly less than a single robot box’.
The rotary ranges from 28-80 stalls, with capacity to milk between 120 and 400 cows per hour. The system is available in the UK, with current interest and predictions of the first installation in the next two years.
Kees de Koning, Wageningen University in the Netherlands, said: “The technology is ready to be applied, but it is the farmer’s choice if they go with an automated milking system or a traditional parlour. Their management skills and comfort level with technology are key factors for success.”

MONOBOX

Also being launched was GEA’s mono-box milking robot. Geared towards farmers with up to 70 cows maximum, the robot uses the same technology as the DairyProQ rotary. It will be available to UK farmers in 2016.
Source: FG Insight

World’s largest robotic dairy barn produces happy, high yielding cows

Aad and Wilma van Leeuwen say the barn runs like clockwork. John Bisset/Fairfax Media

The quiet comes as surprise. No stomping or scraping of hooves, no mooing or snorting as one might expect from 1150 dairy cows housed under one roof. Instead, it’s the subdued munch of animals feeding and the soft clunk and hum of the robotics that make this, the world’s largest dairy barn, operational.

It belongs to Aad and Wilma van Leeuwen of van Leeuwen Dairy Group, one of the biggest dairy collectives in Canterbury. The company comprises 12 holdings and 12,000 dairy cattle.

Three of the farms are run by Aad and Wilma’s children. The giant barn, which was completed last September, is the third “robotic” dairy barn the van Leeuwens have built, but the first of its scale. Behind the drive to build it was the premium price paid for winter milking, a shortage of skilled staff, and the challenge.

“Winter milking in this part of the world is tough on cows and staff,” Aad said. “In a nutshell, robotic, or voluntary, milking systems (VMS) allow dairy cows to live indoors and be milked without human labour. The core of the system is a type of agricultural robot, and computers and special herd management software.”

The van Leeuwens said they saw a challenging opportunity when a 600-hectare property at Makikihi came up for sale. There was ample potential – enough land to build a barn and grow the feed to sustain it.

An external view of the 13,000 sq m barn. It is the size of two rugby fields. John Bisset/Fairfax Media

 

However, the land was within Environment Canterbury’s orange (at risk) and red (unacceptable) water quality zones. They needed to prove the farm would be run “sustainably” using only the effluent from the barn as fertiliser.

“On this farm, what comes out of the barn is recycled and goes back on to the farm,” Wilma said. “We’ve proved to the authorities that what we are doing here is sustainable. The farm grows all its own cow fodder on surrounding land (apart from meal pellets fed during milking) and so completes the cycle of a completely self-sufficient farm.”

It took 12 months to build the 13,000 square metre barn (193m x 67m) and install the 24 DeLaval robots needed for the milking. DeLaval is a Swedish company that develops, manufactures and distributes equipment for milk production and animal husbandry.

A view from the “bridge” showing five of the 24 milking machines. John Bisset/Fairfax Media

The cows were introduced in September last year: 740 to begin with; currently 1150, but increasing to a full capacity of 1500 within the next few months.

First up, the cows are trained to voluntarily enter the milking stall and be milked. Lured in by a tasty snack of meal pellets, they are milked by robots with hydraulic arms guided by optical cameras and dual lasers. Each teat is cleaned with warm water and air, stimulated, pre-milked before milking, and disinfected after milking.

Each robot is controlled by a touch screen, with the capability of remote operation from the central office, suspended below the ceiling with a birds-eye view of the barn. Special collars and ear tags collect data on the cow’s yield, how many times a day she has milked, and her general health. If she has milked recently, the robot turns her away.

A cow takes advantage of the automated back-scratcher. John Bisset/Fairfax Media

The 24 milking robots are arranged in eight groups with 60-65 cows milked per robot. After milking, the cows either go back to the barn or are sorted into a separation pen for treatment or insemination if required.

In the meantime the milk is piped to two silo tanks outside the barn, from where it is collected by tanker. On its way to the tanks it is cooled using a pre-cooler, and then a water chiller.

The water used for pre-cooling is later given to the cows and the heat-recovery system takes care of the warm water needed to clean the milking robot. Cleaning of the robots is done via a cascade system, so that in each group there is always at least one robot available to milk the cows.

Hundreds of cows feed contentedly in the van Leeuwen’s giant dairy barn. John Bisset/Fairfax Media

The effluent is removed regularly by scrapers, and collected in a 12.5million litre above-ground tank outside the barn. Later it is spread by vacuum tank onto the surrounding pasture. The tank is sufficient to store half a year’s worth.

The vast barn will house the cows for 10 months of the year. The cows are rotated outside for the two months they aren’t lactating. The floor is rubberised for their comfort, and each animal has an individual stall with foam mat to lie on, and the use of a back-scratcher.

There are multiple feed lanes distributing a mix of maize silage, lucerne silage, grass silage and protein additives. Cows can feed, wander along the lanes, lie down or be milked at will and appear tranquil and relaxed.

By end of the year, the Van Leeuwens will introduce a new technology called the DeLaval herd navigator to test milk for signs of ketosis, mastitis and whether the cow is in heat.

“The navigator can identify cows in heat with 95 per cent accuracy,” Aad said. “It will detect 80 per cent of mastitis (an infection of the cow’s udder) before it becomes visible.”

When the barn reaches full capacity (1500 cows) it is expected to produce a massive 1.2million kilograms of milk solids a year. (Milk solids are the protein and fat left after water has been removed from the milk). Already the cows are producing twice the milk they would if outdoors. The van Leeuwens want to push production up to 700-800 kg of milk solids per cow within three to five years.

“The cost of production is just over $4.50 a kg of milk solids,” Wilma said. “The home-grown fodder – mainly maize, lucerne and grass silage – was costed at 20 cents a kg of dry matter for budgeting purposes, but we can produce it for less.

“We sold a 450,000kg ­milk solids farm and invested its proceeds into this farm, which is going to do nearly three times the production by the time it is up and running fully.”

“It gives you a bit of an idea with what you can do, ­compared with outdoors.”

The van Leeuwens feel robotic milking gives farmers the chance to reduce labour costs per kilogram of milk solids produced. It also does away with the need to milk twice a day. As well as increased production, it offers a better lifestyle for the farmer, their staff and the cows,

“These are happy cows and happy cows produce more milk,” Wilma said.

Source: Stuff

Calf Cloned From Somatic Cells in Urine

A Murrah buffalo heifer calf has been created by isolating somatic cells from the urine of an elite, high yielding female dairy heifer.

The National Dairy Research Institute (NDRI) announced that Apurva the calf was born healthy at a weight of 37 kilos earlier this spring.

Apurva joins Lalima, also produced from the same buffalo, said Dr A K Srivastava, director of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR).

Dr Srivastava said the calf was born by normal parturition.

Apurva’s dam produced 2713 kg milk in standard lactation period of 305 days and 3494 kg in total lactation period of 471 days, during her 3 third lactation.

Dr Srivastava also said that this is the first report in the world across the species in which somatic cells have been isolated from urine, resulting in a cloned calf.

This new achievement of producing cloned calf from adult lactating animals by hand-guided cloning technique will facilitate faster multiplication of elite germplasm and help us to face the challenges of increasing demands of milk due to growing human population, Dr. S. Ayyappan, Secretary DARE and Director General, ICAR said while congratulating the team on this development.

Dr Srivastava further emphasized that this technology could go a long way in multiplying the number of best milk buffaloes in India.

He called for an “urgent need” to bolster buffalo genetics, which despite providing 55 per cent of the country’s milk, are behind targets.

Source: The Cattle Site

Could the Apple Watch Fit Farming?

Mainstream technology took a major leap forward today with the launch of the Apple Watch, but agriculture is already firmly on board with the wearable revolution.

While the tech fraternity evaluates the performance of the long-awaited wrist adorning computer, the agricultural sector could potentially welcome the item as a new implement at its disposal.

A plethora of wearable devices is already available in farming today. Boot mounted grass measurers are just one example of ways farmers can maximise efficiencies by wearing pioneering gear.

In the pipe-line, smart glasses – effectively having a computer on your head – will be used on some farms in the coming years, it has been suggested.

There is also a range of apps and smart phone devices to manage manure, soil, calvings and even acquire pig stockmen skills.

This is all part of a trend for rapid transfer of data around the farm, allowing growers to plan spraying campaigns from the farm office while wheat is monitored by drones in the sky.

But the farmers aren’t the only ones wearing technology. Pens of pigs and cattle have been recorded by microphone to reveal secrets about animal behaviour and welfare.

This is helping assist the industry in addressing aggression in pigs and complications like tail biting.

And in terms of health, rather than welfare, microphones can predict the onset of disease.

Recording calf coughs to create algorithms from acoustic analyses can alert stockmen for costly ailments such as Bovine Respiratory Disease.

Similarly, farmers could soon be able to attach an accelerometer on a cow’s tail to give a warning merely hours before the calf is born.

Furthermore, mysteries around forage availability and feed intake are being unravelled through bioacoustics in which scientists listen in on livestock chewing and biting.

However, few of these devices have come close to rivalling the Apple Watch in terms of grabbing headlines. Technology magazines have been positive, although shortfalls have been alluded to.

An evaluation by CNET said Apple’s latest release offered, for a smartwatch, “a very promising assortment of software”.

For some time now, media gurus have been shouting about how tech-savvy farmers are becoming.

Tweets are often sent from tractor cabs and combine harvesters, giving instant coverage of a harvest or cultivation campaign.

Over the years, social media has also become a popular way for farmers to discuss, debate and circulate news and reports.

In its evaluation of the Apple Watch, CNET praises its social media capabilities. Could this be an ideal fit for farmers?

Source: The Dairy Site

Meeting in the middle: farm technology and consumers

I feel incredibly lucky to live and work in the Kansas City area. We are at the heart of the country, and I’ve always thought of this area as the crossroads where cultures converge — this is where urban meets rural, agriculture meets business, and tradition meets modern technology.

Last week, I had the opportunity to attend a panel at Middle of the Map Fest, a music, forum and film festival, which discussed just that. The panel, called Hungry for Technology, brought together panelists from various agriculture and technology backgrounds to discuss why modern agriculture is crucial to meeting growing global food demand and how farmers are using new technology to make food more accessible through safe and efficient farming practices.

Bruce Brinkmeyer, manager of insecticide products for the animal health division of Bayer HealthCare, moderated the panel. Panelists included Andrew Fansler, a first-generation grain farmer from Shelbyville, Ind.; Brian O’Banion, director of sales and business development for Farmobile; and Dale Blasi, a beef specialist at Kansas State University.

Brinkmeyer started off by discussing the limitations of modern farming. With less than 2 percent of the population directly involved in farming and less than 2 percent of the earth available for agriculture production, feeding a hungry and growing population is becoming increasingly difficult.

“The available earth to produce food isn’t going to increase,” he said. “If the population really does explode to 9 billion by 2050, that [extra food production] can really only come from better use of technology and smarter ways to get things done.”

Technology is already the driving force that makes it possible for such a small farming population to feed the world, and the thought-provoking presentation served as a reminder for how often consumers take that for granted.

The average American spends less than 7 percent of his or her income on food, Brinkmeyer said. This gives us a unique food situation in our country — that number nearly doubles in other first world countries, like France and Japan, and can reach as high as 40 or 50 percent of income in developing areas of the globe.

Americans are lucky to have a reliable food production system that provides us with safe, quality nutrition — a system that is made possible by advanced technology, Brinkmeyer explained.

That technology is also what will make it possible to feed a growing global population, the panelists agreed.

As farming operations become more concentrated, farmers are becoming more innovative, using technology to more efficiently and sustainably produce large quantities of food. Fansler suggested technology can also be used to help consumers reconnect with the agriculture community.

“Technology plays a key role in letting consumers understand what it is we’re doing on the farm,” Fansler said.

“People think we as farmers pollute everything we touch by using fertilizers, chemicals and manure. In all actuality, it’s the complete opposite,” he said. “We live there. We raise our families there. We have made our lives there. We are probably the best stewards of the land in the world. We don’t pour concrete on it. We don’t put sewers in it. We don’t do these things that are destroying the land. There are fewer and fewer of us every day, and more and more of you every day. Technology helps us tell our story.”

Telling that story is increasingly important, especially as farmers begin incorporating new technology on their operations. Fansler already uses drones to help him monitor crop growth, and remote sensors allow him to check that equipment is working properly while he’s away from the operation.

This technology might sound foreign and scary to everyday consumers, who don’t always fully understand modern farming practices and have voiced concerns about genetically modified organisms and other scientific and technological advances in food production.

“People are afraid of change,” he said. “It takes a while to accept technology. It’s a phenomenon that’s existed in every aspect of our society.”

Much like the city that hosted Middle of the Map Fest, it seems modern agriculture is at a crossroads. People are becoming more removed from the farm, yet increasingly interested in where their food comes from. Farmers are expected to meet growing global demand for food while using the same amount of land and conserving resources.

The result is a population that is hungry, not only for food, but also to know where their food comes from — and it will take the help of technology to feed them.

Source: Dairy Farmers of America

They’re Using Drones to Herd Sheep

Some tech-savvy farmers are opting for copters over canines; ‘you don’t have to feed it’

Herding dogs beware: Some farmers are turning to drones to herd livestock. Photo: Valentin Farro

First they supplanted secretaries, factory workers and store clerks. Now robots are setting their sensors on one of the world’s oldest jobs: herding sheep.

Michael Thomson’s drone

Michael Thomson’s drone

Michael Thomson says his homemade drone is the fastest way to move the roughly 1,000 sheep on his sister’s spread in Dannevirke, New Zealand, to greener pastures. Workers on the 200-acre ranch typically have used horses or all-terrain vehicles to herd the animals and check on their condition. Those all are tasks his quadcopter, a helicopter with four rotors, can do in a fraction of the time, says Mr. Thomson, 22 years old.

“There are limitations, but you don’t have to get on a horse, you don’t have to feed it,” Mr. Thomson says. “Just give it more batteries.”

What do the sheep think? Most seem to respect the drone, though some just look quizzically until it is “a foot away from them and then they realize, Oh crap. I got to run,” he says. “Sheep are naturally scared of things that might attack them.”

Tech-savvy livestock farmers from the Australian Outback to the Irish countryside are starting to use drones as a relatively cheap alternative to the cowboy and the sheepdog. Camera-wielding copters that can be bought off-the-shelf for as little as $500 can cover hilly terrain quickly, finding and guiding sheep and cattle while the rancher operates remotely—sometimes wearing goggles that show the drone’s perspective.

The experiments of early adopters like Mr. Thomson offer new hope to roboticists who have been working for at least two decades on using machines to herd livestock. Scientists at the University of Oxford and other U.K. universities launched the “Robot Sheepdog Project” in 1995, and developed a box-size device that could chase a dozen ducks to one place in an enclosed area.

Using goggles that show the drone's perspective, Michael Thomson pilots his homemade drone to herd sheep at Battle Hill Farm outside Wellington, New Zealand.

Using goggles that show the drone’s perspective, Michael Thomson pilots his homemade drone to herd sheep at Battle Hill Farm outside Wellington, New Zealand. PHOTO: VALENTIN FARRO

More recently, researchers in the U.K. and Sweden attached tracking devices to sheep and a sheepdog to collect data on their movements and comprehend the science behind the dogs’ herding success. And researchers in Australia currently are building a four-wheel robot that can pursue cattle at walking pace to calm the cows’ nerves.

Generally, farmers aren’t ready to swap Rover for a robot on wheels. “It’d have to be one heck of a robot to be able to move at the speed and handle the terrain like a dog,” said farmer Rick Powdrell, an executive at a New Zealand farmer’s trade group. “Then there is the question of endurance. I don’t think I have ever had to reboot one of my dogs.”

Flying robots, though, are starting to give sheepdogs a run for their money. Paul Brennan, a supermarket manager in Carlow, Ireland, uses the Chinese-made Q500 Typhoon, a $1,300 quadcopter he calls Shep, to herd sheep at his brother’s 100-acre farm. He says Shep can round up a flock as quickly as a dog or four-wheeler. The pace of progress in drone technology means they will soon be the go-to tool for shepherds, he says. In the meantime, “it’s a good option if you’re feeling lazy.”

In South Carolina, farmer Scott Hunt said when he received a drone for Christmas, he tried it on his 20 cows. “They thought it was a huge horsefly,” he said.

Others envision drones in more serious roles. Farmers in the U.S. and elsewhere are flying sensor-equipped drones over their crops to gather data on the plants’ size and health. And ranchers are using unmanned aircraft to count livestock, locate animals scattered across large properties and even spot which cattle are sick or in heat using thermal sensors.

In the Scottish Highlands, agricultural policies are leading farmers to keep fewer sheep on larger tracts of land, making the animals harder to find and causing some shepherds to walk many miles a day, according to researchers at Harper Adams University in Shropshire, England.

Harper Adams engineers have tried developing drones that can automatically spot sheep and round them up. They considered using thermal sensors to spot the sheep, but opted instead to put red targets on their backs.

In the Australian Outback, many ranches use helicopters to herd cattle that roam areas of up to 1 million acres. Jack Hurley, one of those pilots, says he knows drones will replace him once their battery life improves, so he is trying to build such a device today.

Mr. Hurley’s colleague, Ross “Rossy Rotor” McDowell, is confident that his job is safe. It sometimes takes him 10 hours to muster several hundred cows over thousands of acres. Drones “need to have at least three-hour endurance before there are any breakthroughs,” said Mr. McDowell, who has a pink two-seat chopper. “But they’re handy for getting maverick cattle from one yard to another, when it’s bloody dangerous to get in there with them.”

Of course, man has long employed other helpers to guard and herd livestock. Around 30 B.C., Horace, the ancient Roman poet, called dogs “the shepherd’s dangerous friends.” Human beings have bred dogs over centuries to create more specialized herders or guards for their livestock, and there are now more than 70 breeds of herding dogs, including the Australian Stumpy Tail Cattle Dog, the Hairy Mouth Heeler, and the Rough Collie—the breed exemplified by the dog Lassie.

Some might wonder: What’s wrong with the canine? Dogs aren’t expensive to keep and they are definitely better company than drones.

“They don’t talk about a dog being man’s best friend for nothing,” said Mr. Powdrell, the New Zealand farmer. “We certainly don’t have that same connection with our tractors.”

Academics working on robotic herders say their work has a higher purpose than furthering automation: People and dogs stress out livestock, while robots can mean calmer, happier animals.

But it isn’t always so easy to measure that under real-life conditions. Richard Vaughn, a roboticist who led the 1995 project to use a robot to herd ducks, said heart-rate and blood tests showed “the animals were less stressed by the robot than they were by either the humans or by—well, we actually used a stuffed fox rather than a dog.”

Source: Wall Street Journal

Embracing technology in farming could help you reap the rewards

Devon County Show president David Parish

Farmers across the South West are embracing cutting-edge technology and reaping the rewards with increased output and healthier animals.

Studies have shown that by 2050 the world population will increase by 30 per cent, but farmers will have the same amount of land.

Precision farming technology such as automated steering, yield mapping and robotic milking systems are helping to increase the accuracy and efficiency of farm operations, helping farmers to optimise inputs to feed a growing global population.

One of the ways in which farmers are embracing this technology is through ‘driverless tractors’, fitted with a Global Positioning System (GPS). Tractors fitted with GPS technology are able to plot their position in the field and plough a line that is accurate to within two to three centimetres, reducing cost and time while producing a higher yield of crops.

Cornish vegetable growers Riviera Produce is at the forefront of farming innovation, investing in the latest technology to maximise its harvest and produce the best possible crops for customers. Growing over 5,000 acres of cauliflowers, cabbages, broccoli and courgettes at Connor Downs near Hayle, Riviera Produce has invested in high accuracy ‘hands free’ tractors which are estimated to make £100,000 worth of savings over the next four years.

David Simmons, managing director of Riviera Produce, said: “GPS, with its precision technology, has improved the quality of cauliflowers, broccoli and cabbages we grow, ensuring our customers get maximum satisfaction from our Cornish produce. It has transformed our farming business by improving precision in the fields which has led to reduced use of fertilizer and pesticides with a more accurate application and faster planting times.”

It’s not just farmers’ fields that are benefiting from the latest technology. More and more dairy farmers are opting for automated milking and feeding systems to increase the longevity of their cows and help make their businesses more sustainable for the future.

Farming lecturers and students at Duchy College’s Stoke Climsland campus have been pioneering farming techniques of the future, most noticeably through its Spearhead Academy and Future Farm project.

Dr Phil Le Grice, head of Rural Economy at The Cornwall College Group, said it was important for farmers to embrace technology in order to make their enterprises more sustainable for the future.

“Humanity is facing some tough decisions; the world’s population is predicted to increase by 30 per cent by 2050, but we will have the same level of natural resources. That means farmers have to work smarter by using the latest technology to increase precision, ensuring that every part of their land is used productively and profitably.”

He added: “Our Future Farm project will rekindle the link between farming and academia; carrying out important research into milk production. The findings will inform industry and enabling it to work more efficiently with the aid of technology and research.”

ALL CHANGE IN THE MILKING SHED

Dairy farmers in the South West are also grasping the latest cutting-edge technology in order to increase efficiency, support animal health and welfare, and revolutionize the milking routine.

The most-up-to-date robotic, computerized milking parlors don’t just give dairy cows the freedom to decide when they wish to be milked, in the most efficient and streamlined way, but they can also closely monitor the quality of the milk being produced.

Since installing three Lely robotic milking machines two-and-a-half years ago, Devon County Show president David Parish, from Uffculme, has seen a transformation in the performance and overall wellbeing of his 170 Friesian cows.

The farm is also equipped with a state-of-the-art anaerobic digester that turns the farm’s slurry, ‘seasoned’ with some maize silage, into electricity, 40 per cent of which is used to power and the farm and the rest sold to the grid.

The robots have lifted the traditional tie of spending hours in the parlor milking twice a day, as the cows are able to move freely from the cubicle and feeding areas to the robots – where they are given a meal of cow cake as they are being milked.

The investment has also provided David, now 70, with a vast array of information and statistics on every one of his cows, including their yield and frequency through the milking machines.

As he explains, the herd have taken to the robot milkers and their new routine extremely well: “About 80 per cent get the hang of it after you put them through just once.

“The other 20 per cent might need showing what to do a couple of times, but they all get the idea.”

Source: The Western Morning News

Wearable Technology is Making its Way to the Farm

Many people have heard of Google Glass and how it allows users the ability to get connected to common Web applications without using their hands. But can such technology help run your farm? Yes, and Craig Ganssle, founder and CEO of Basecamp Networks, says some agricultural operators are already capitalizing on it.

“We have developed a software program called intelliSCOUT which can analyze plants like tomatoes and instantly determine if they have contracted certain diseases just by glancing at them,” Ganssle told attendees at the 2015 PDPW Business Conference, sponsored by the Professional Dairy Producers of Wisconsin.

IntelliSCOUT also has the ability to scan a cob of corn and count its individual kernels within seconds to determine the crop’s yield.

Ganssle said the program works by processing data from the wearable Google Glass device and channeling that information through the software. It can also work with smart phones and tablets in some cases.

Ganssle said the goal is to develop more applications that can be used on dairy farms, such as recognizing all of the cows in the barn and instantly bring up each of those animals’ production and health records.

“Essentially we are trying to help use modern technology to make running your farm easier and more profitable,” Ganssle notes. “If time is money, then program like these can lead to healthier profits on your farm.”

The intelliSCOUT software is distributed through Basecamp’s agricultural division, which is called FarmHouse Networks. More information on the company’s latest projects can be found by going to: www.farmhousenetworks.com

More highlights from the 2015 PDPW Business Conference are available at www.pdpw.org.

Professional Dairy Producers of Wisconsin is a dairy-producer founded organization that provides educational programs and services to fellow dairy producers. PDPW’s mission is “to share ideas, solutions, resources, and experiences that help dairy producers succeed.”

Robotic Milking Systems: Breed for Profit Not For Machines

Pick up any dairy magazine or go to any online dairy information site, and you will see numerous ads for milking using robots. In fact, even the ads for sires contain reference to the fact that a sire is Robot Ready as it relates to his daughters being friendly to being milked by a robot. But is it wise to only breed cows to accommodate machinery? Let’s dig deeper when it comes to breeding cows for systems and machines of the future.

Robotic Milking

The first robots were installed in herds of sixty or fewer cows and were an adaption of claw type milking machines. Difficulties were encountered when the machine could not find or attach to the teats or when the milk stimulation was not adequate, and the machine detached before there was milk letdown. Owners routinely complained about cows where the rear teats were too close, and the machine could not determine which rear teat to attach to. Often valuable cows with close or touching rear teats had to be culled from herd breeding programs.

Robot Friendly Sires

A.I. mating and marketing programs adapted and coined the term robot ready for sires whose daughters were more suited to robotic milking. As well after some experience with their robotic milking systems, breeders also removed from their breeding programs sires that produced daughters that had short teats or whose udders were too deep or too shallow to be milked by the robot. Sires, like Planet, who leave close rear teats, short teats and sometimes deeper udders were not used as much as their high TPI or NM$ indexes would warrant. Sires like O Man and Ramos were more desired as they left wider rear teat placement than normal even though the teats cold be somewhat short. Other bloodlines, like Shottle and Goldwyn, did not have problems with robotic milking, as their females had more middle to the quarter teat placement, and teat length was at least average.

Milking Machine Technology Advances

Over the past decade, there have been significant advances in robotic milking technology. The systems remember a cow’s physical configuration and know how to attach successfully. As well machines now exist that do not use the claw cluster principal and therefore are not limited by height or distance. Today’s robotic milking systems not only milk the cows and discard non-saleable milk, but they also collect almost endless amount of data that can be used for cow and herd management and also for breeding and feeding.

If a new milking system is in your future, whether in a single box unit or in a parlor, and you do not make breeding decisions based on show ring type, it may be time for you to reconsider trait emphasised in your breeding program. With milking machine technology advancing quickly and with less than 0.5% of North American dairy cows culled for poor udder conformation, then why continue to insist that your cows need to have show ring udders? Deeper in front, unbalanced side to side, only milking on three quarters or teats not hanging plumb, machines will milk them all.

Breed for Your Own Situation

No two breeders have the same dairy farming scenario or plan. Often genetics is asked to make up for management deficiencies and appropriate priorities are not attached to the traits included in the herd’s breeding program. It is your farm, and you need to decide on the traits and the emphasis allocated to them. If there is more than one trait given the lead emphasis then genetic progress will be significantly reduced. TPI, NM$ or LPI are not a trait and are best used to short list the sires that could be used.

Breed for Profit

For the vast majority of dairy farms, the length of time a cow is productive in the herd has a very significant affect on profit. If there was data captured on the heifer herds and genetic evaluations done using that data then, profit per lifetime could be used in breeding decisions. In most herds increasing the length of productive life by one lactation would reduce herd turnover anywhere from 25% to 50%. Thereby the number of herd replacements and size of the heifer herd could be reduced by 25% to 50%. The resulting cost savings for the dairy enterprise could be from 8% to 16%. That’s huge.

Have a Sire Selection Plan

Consider the following plan when you next purchase semen. Short list the bulls in the gTPI, gLPI or NM$ sire listings to those that are in the top 20 to 30 sires.

Lead Emphasis: Use the index for productive life (PL in USA or HL in Canada) as the lead selection criteria. Those indexes are a combination of factors that determine profit as they are the summation of all things reproductive, health, production, mobility, and conformation.

Secondary Emphasis: The three areas, in order of the importance for breeding, are: production (fat plus protein yield); fertility (FI in USA or DF in Canada); and health (SCS in USA or Mastitis Resistance in Canada)

Useful Information: Traits that can be used to fine tune mating decisions include: Udder Depth (deep udders are detrimental for udder health and cow mobility); Rear Teat Placement (rear teats too close together can create problems for milking); Teat Length (teats too short and too long can both create problem for milking); Milking Speed (slow milking cows lengthen the time to milk a herd); Foot Angle (deep hoofs are associated with less foot infection, less hoof trimming and superior cow mobility); Rear Legs Rear View (cows that walk straighter are more mobile and push the udder out of position to a lesser degree); and Maternal Calving Ease (MCE in USA or DCA in Canada. Bulls’ daughters that give birth easier lead to fewer health problems for both dam and calf, fewer deaths at calving and save on labor costs)

Any other traits are simply chrome for the majority of dairy farmers.

Sire Rankings Using Productive Life

The following tables rank North America sires for productive life (PL in USA and HL in Canada). In developing these lists, only the top ranked sires for gTPI and gLPI were considered.

Table 1 – Top 10 Productive Life (PL) Sires from the Top 30 Daughter Proven gTPI Sires (Dec ’14)

NamePLgTPINM$F+P YieldFert IndexSCSMCEU DepthRTPT LengthFoot AngleRLRV
6.72337571693.42.8260.71 S0.44 C-0.10 S1.050.88
Wright9.62355631485.32.655.2-0.21 D0.13 C0.48 L0.62-0.33
Petrone7.52361549453.82.685.91.26 S0.93 C0.14 L1.411.5
Denim7.323566158252.715.60.33 S-2.58 W1.95 L1.140.16
Erdman6.92260631913.62.777-0.36 D-0.09 W-0.81 S-2.1-0.55
Shamrock6.72304565663.22.94.11.02 S2.08 C-3.24 S-0.260.04
Robust6.325047671301.83.063.80.27 S1.14 C-0.76 S11.72
Sapporo5.92248438434.52.867.70.88 S1.19 C-1.15 S1.060.61
Freddie5.62349533614.62.915.30.71 S-0.20 W0.72 L2.341.83
Dorcy5.5233952771-0.12.798.61.75 S1.43 C1.05 L2.452.27
Epic5.322964495322.886.31.50 S0.37 C0.65 L2.861.57

Wright stands out as the clear leader for PL. The sire stack Freddie x Wizard also rings the bell in #3 position. The other sire stack with two on the list (#2 and #10) is Super x AltaBaxter. These ten proven sires produce daughters that remain in herds 202 days longer than the breed average and are sires that on average also produce daughters that are high for fertility, health, production, conformation and maternal calving ease. Robust leads in production but need to be watched for SCS. Shamrock with both close and short rear needs to be correctively mated for those areas.

Table 2 – Top 10 Productive Life (PL) Sires from the Top 30 Genomic gTPI Sires (Dec ’14)

NamePLgTPINM$F+P YieldFert IndexSCSMCEU DepthRTPT LengthFoot AngleRLRV
8.426878201083.62.7151.66 S1.33 C-1.12 S1.881.48
Motega9.82665790774.42.685.22.83 S1.03 C-1.62 S2.142.44
Charismatic9.128099851521.82.74.31.94 S0.19C-1.80 S2.672.37
Halbert92702770825.72.624.22.02 S2.39 C-1.01 S0.780.54
Director8.3275988213242.844.71.31 S2.22 C-1.66 S1.090.46
Troy8.32650788963.62.6661.42 S0.62 C02.842.19
Dozer8.226508051072.92.565.81.22 S1.02 C-1.25 S1.571.34
Multiply8.2263577310032.855.82.45 S0.80C-1.01 S3.442.72
Tailor7.92634740933.32.614.71.62 S2.59 C-0.46 S1.40.81
Delta7.827098731322.42.775.51.00 S1.34 C-1.55 S2.261.46
Santano7.826527921114.42.823.70.79 S1.12 C-0.81 S0.610.51

Two points stand out when looking at Table 2. Firstly it is expected that the daughters of these sires will stay in herds 257 days longer than average. Even if we regress that number down, as we know genomic indexes are perhaps 10% overestimated, it is still a wow number. The other point of note is the fact all these bulls were sired by genomic sires and in some cases it is a genomic sire on genomic sire. On average, all the indexes are very high but it should be noted that rear teats are indexed to be both close and short. An outstanding group of sires than can be used to increase herd life.

Table 3 – Top 8 Herd Life (HL) Sires from the Top 20 Daughter Proven gLPI Sires (Dec’14)

NameHLgLPIF+P YieldDFMastitisResistDCAU DepthRTPT LengthM SpeedFoot AngleRLRV 
Lego11229581171041071073 S9 C10 S97014
AltaRazor1112962139961021092 S5 C3 L10255
Gillsepy1092981134981021022 S5 C097136
Boulder10929121291071011013 S5 C10 L10412
Freddie10928851161121021075 S5 W010748
Dempsey1092856621001071057 C5 C5 S101912
Phoenix10828711381001031034 S7 C9 S9525
AltaCaliber10829019610510410810 S6 W2 L10783
Average10929161161031041055 S3 C1 S10157

These eight sires are all within the top 6% of the Canadian population for Herd Life. Freddie has done an excellent job of improving productive life and appears in both Tables 1 and 3. In Table 3 his daughter fertility stands out at 112. All the sires are rated above average for yield, fertility, and mastitis resistance. Among the eight there are sires that can be used to improve traits where females in a herd may be lacking.

Table 4 – Top 8 Herd Life (HL( Sires from the Top 20 Genomic gLPI Sires (Dec’14)

NameHLgLPIF+P YieldDFMastitisResistDCAU DepthRTPT LengthM SpeedFoot AngleRLRV
Average11635031811091031096 C3 C010187
Penmanship12135001631131041077 S2 W1 L10797
Rubicon11635961981101011114 S5 C2 S102813
Supershot11635421991081041103 S3 C3 L9876
Brodie11635251901071021073 S3 C3 L9854
Boastful11635001821101021118 S1 C010171
Flattop11634301671071071057 S1 C2 L10278
Kobra11635001581101031098 C5 C3 S1011211
Modesto11534301911071001114 S2 C3 S9767

The list of sires in Table 4 are, simply put, outstanding for improving Herd Life. As in Table 2 all these eight bulls are sired by genomic sires. On average, they excel for all traits included in the table. The trait where these sires shine, as compared to the sires in the other tables, is in Feet and Legs. Kobra, Rubicon, and Penmanship are particularly high for feet and legs. The fact that all these sires are rated at 105 or greater for daughter calving ability and at 107 or higher for daughter fertility is very impressive.

Table 5 – Top 5 Productive Life (PL) Sires from the Top 20 Genomic Polled gTPI Sires (Dec’14)

NamePLgTPINM$F+P YieldFert IndexSCSMCEU DepthRTPT LengthFoot AngleRLRV
Layton6.52429611862.32.8261.29 S0.44 C0.26 L0.591.14
Harpoon62281574801.42.776.11.68 S0.79 C-0.86 S0.430.86
Champ5.922824222532.617.13.05 S1.14 C1.71 L0.570.6
Homerun5.323455801000.62.827.40.83 S-0.20 W0.52 L-0.910.53
Gremlin5.32286581961.52.95.50.12 S0.91 C0.33 L0.070.14
Average5.82325554771.82.786.41.39 S0.62 C0.39 L0.510.65

First off it needs to be said how quickly Holstein polled genetics is improving. All are polled by horned crosses and show how breeders are moving to incorporating polled into their herds. Unfortunately, none of these bulls are PP but still using these sires will leave half their daughters polled and each one of the five has strengths that can match breeders’ needs. Layton stands out a clear leader. He is just now a year old and hopefully will soon have semen available. If production is a breeder’s choice for their first secondary trait, then Homerun is the leader.

Clearly there are many many sires on these lists that will increase the rate of genetic advancement for length of productive life.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Both dairy farming and breeding are changing at an ever increasing pace. Considerable pressure is being placed on on-farm margins with decreased milk prices and increased costs. Ways must be found by breeders to eliminate costs and losses. Breeding cows differently for the future will be required in order for dairy enterprises to be viable and sustainable. Using increased length of productive life as a primary selection tool needs to be part of every breeders plan in breeding for profit.

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

New Tool Evaluates Options for Reducing Odors in Livestock Operations

A team of Iowa State University Extension and Outreach specialists have developed an online tool to help livestock and poultry producers compare odor mitigation techniques that could be useful on their farms.

Air Management Practices Assessment Tool, AMPAT for short, is web-based and available at no charge at www.agronext.iastate.edu/ampat.

“The website was developed to help livestock and poultry producers identify practices to reduce odors, and emissions of gases and dust on their farms caused by animal production. The database lists options to be used from three core sources of odor and emissions in their operations — animal housing, manure storage and handling and land application,” said Angie Rieck-Hinz, an ISU Extension field agronomist and member of the project team.

Other members of the team include Jay Harmon, Steven Hoff and Dan Andersen, professors of agricultural and biosystems engineering at Iowa State.

Producers can select a specific mitigation practice and learn more about its effectiveness and relative cost. Rieck-Hinz said producers can use AMPAT in conjunction with the National Air Quality Site Assessment Tool (http://naqsat.tamu.edu/) to identify opportunities to make changes, find best practices for improving air quality and evaluate their effectiveness.

To evaluate practices on AMPAT, the producer can select from one of the three core odor source areas. Each category provides access to resources that are specific to a particular pollutant. Once a pollutant is selected, a variety of resources are listed. This list includes a research-based publication on the recommended practice, pros and cons of using the recommended practice and a short video. Additional information and related links also are provided.

“Our goal was to develop a tool that is easy to use and provides relevant and useful information for livestock producers across the state,” Harmon said. “AMPAT helps producers see which technologies have the highest impact. The scorecard is color-coded for quick reference.”

The AMPAT website shows a colored-coded listing of technologies to address pollutants. A green color indicates the selected technology has a high impact on that particular pollutant; yellow and red indicate medium and low impact, respectively. No color indicates there is insufficient data available to classify the effectiveness.

“For example, if a producer was concerned about a potential odor problem from animal housing, he would scan down the list under the ‘odor’ column at the top. From the list, he would find that ‘Siting,’ ‘Scrubbers,’ ‘Urine/Feces Segregation’ and ‘Biofilters’ have green bars, meaning they have high impact on odors. With that information, the producer could then investigate options for implementing those technologies and evaluate their selection based on relative cost or investigate all four options for their farm.”

“It’s not uncommon for a producer to identify best practices and implement them in their operation,” he said. “They want to be good neighbors and this tool helps them to achieve that goal.”

Development of the tool was completed by an Iowa State University Extension and Outreach project team with major funding from the National Pork Board.

Source: Iowa State University

GEA Farm Technologies Introduces an On-Farm System to Manufacture Hygiene Products

GEA Farm Technologies is proud to bring dairy producers an on-farm system to improve operational efficiency and create high quantities of economical, safe and effective germicidal solutions. The new NCharge™ Hygiene Production System is a sophisticated, patented technology that combines automation and chemistry. This unique system combines soft water from a dairy and a sodium chloride solution together with electrochemical activation to create an extremely active germicidal solution called NCharge Concentrate. The NCharge Concentrate can then be diluted or blended with unique and exclusive NCharge additives to create a wide range of dairy hygiene products.

The NCharge technology provides dairy producers the ability to produce pre-dips, post-dips, footbath solution, premise cleaner, water treatment, backflush solution and clean in place (C.I.P.) products on-farm with the push of a button.

“The NCharge hygiene products have been put through rigorous testing, including University, National Mastitis Council (NMC) protocol and on-farm testing, to ensure their efficacy and microorganism killing power. Dairy producers can have complete confidence in the efficacy of NCharge hygiene products,” explains John Brooks, U.S. national sales manager for hygiene and supplies at GEA Farm Technologies. “The flexibility to produce a wide variety of hygiene products through one on-farm system provides dairy producers with an opportunity to maximize their economic potential. The ability to produce teat dips, footbath solutions as well as other products at the farm level, provides substantial freight cost savings. Most raw materials used in the production of hygiene products are not getting any less expensive so GEA Farm Technologies is doing as much as possible to lower costs and reducing freight is one way we can do that.”

Plus, with the NCharge Hygiene Production System, dairies can reclaim storage space previously used for bulky totes or vertical storage silos. And, the non-iodine based teat dip formulas mean that dairies are less dependent on the price volatility found in the iodine market. Also, NCharge is the only on-farm production system that can create post-dips – and with this addition to the product mix, NCharge provides an even quicker return on your investment.

“The system allows for product to be mixed ahead of time, ensuring product is ready and available when needed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,” says Brooks. “In addition, dairy producers can be confident in the system as it is installed and supported by GEA Farm Technologies dealers.”

The NCharge Hygiene Production System is available in select markets. To find out if NCharge is a fit for your operation, contact GEA Farm Technologies at 1-877-WS-Dairy (1-877-973-2479).

GEA Farm Technologies, a segment of the GEA Group, is headquartered in Bönen, Germany and has subsidiaries in over 60 countries, employing more than 2,300 people worldwide. As a global leader in milking, manure, and livestock housing equipment technology, the company is dedicated to saving producers time, labor and money through increased efficiency, management assistance information and leading-edge product innovation. GEA Farm Technologies provides a complete line of WestfaliaSurge, Houle, and Norbco products to meet producers’ needs of all sizes and management styles.

Source: GEA Farm Technologies

Industry-leading Technologies Showcased on Innovation Dairy Tour

During the Innovation Dairy Tour, hosted by GEA Farm Technologies, producers toured Blaken Farms in Melrose, Wis. The dairy has experienced success with the ApolloTMMilkSystem and improved milk quality through consistent, thorough post-dipping.

GEA Farm Technologies recently hosted a 2014 Innovation Dairy Tour. Dairy producers throughout the U.S. and from seven different countries attended this two-day event to see industry-leading technologies in action on six progressive Wisconsin dairies, including an automatic teat dipping system, a robotic milking system and several other new industry innovations.

“The goal of the Innovation Dairy Tour was to bring producers from across the globe onto dairies for an intimate look at how their peers are advancing their operations and profits by implementing new technologies,” said Matt Daley, president and chief executive officer of GEA Farm Technologies, Inc. “By networking with other dairy producers and the GEA Farm Technologies team, producers learned first-hand how to improve parlor efficiency, milk quality and overall herd performance.”

“We chose this group of dairies because they represent progressive thinking and a variety of pioneering technologies,” said James Bringe, sales consultant for GEA Farm Technologies who works with many of the six host dairy producers. Bringe explained that these farms are getting more cows through the parlor per hour with fewer employees, are producing high quality milk more efficiently and are able to reallocate existing labor resources. “Overall, these operations have seen vast improvements in efficiency because of the technologies they’ve implemented.”

Bringe added that the variety of dairies visited during the tour gave the producers a look into a variety of management strategies and technology options. Dairymen participating in the tour found the format particularly valuable, noting that the personal approach created an environment for open discussion to learn in depth about the technologies these farms have implemented; everything from the decision making process, to installation and tips for improvement.

Dairies visited on the tour and the technologies showcased are as follows:

Dan Val Farms, LLC, Independence, Wis.: Owned by Chris, Karen, Dustin and Drew Ellis, this new facility started production in June of this year and is milking 150 Holsteins with two MIone two-box robotic milking systems. Chris Ellis shared that the cows have transitioned into the system easily and that they have been able to reallocate labor resources to other areas of the operation.

“The new milking system has revolutionized the way we manage our farm,” said Chris Ellis. “We are able to prioritize other areas of the farm to receive more personal attention.”

Blaken Farms, Melrose, Wis.: This milking facility was built in 2002 by the Blaken family, with a 2 x 16 Magnum 90i parallel parlor. The facility also features the ApolloTMMilkSystem, which applies post‑dip and automatically backflushes after detach, resulting in a superior milk harvesting process every time the cow enters the parlor.

“Because the ApolloTMMilkSystem takes care of post-dipping, it allows our milkers to spend more time up front prepping the cows. Our staff is not as rushed and is more focused on the most important part of milking – cow prep,” said Larry Blaken.

Redtail Ridge Dairy, Malone, Wis.: Owned by Joe, Diane and John Thome, this farm milks 1,072 Holsteins and maintains a somatic cell count of 90,000. The Thome family incorporated the FutureCow™ Prep System into their milking routine to improve teat prep procedures and save time in the parlor.

“In one visit to the cow with a FutureCow™ brush, our milking staff can wash, disinfect, stimulate and dry the teats in just a matter of seconds,” said Diane Thome, “which has created greater efficiencies in the parlor.”

Majestic Meadows Dairy, LLC, Sheboygan Falls, Wis.: This operation is owned by Darin, Dean and Ed Strauss and currently houses 900 crossbred cows. The dairy recently incorporated the NCharge™ Hygiene Production System featuring IntelliBlend™ Technology, which was named one of the top new products of 2014 by Dairy Herd Management through their Innovation Awards program.

“NCharge™ offers incredible technology that has provided us savings all around the dairy,” said Darin Strauss, dairy operation manager. “We foam the NCharge™ Pre-Dip and it cleans the cows’ teats very well. We also are very happy with the post-dip performance. Meanwhile, we incorporated the NCharge™ Foot Care product into our hoof care program and we were able to cut our copper sulfate usage in half.”

Pond Hill Dairy, Ft. Atkinson, Wis.: This unique dairy features a research barn that keeps its high performing cows comfortable in Norbco Single Beam freestalls. This particular barn also features a state-of-the-art cross ventilation system with High Plains curtains that are fully automated to keep the barn temperature at an optimal level – anytime of day or night.

“The new ventilation system has really helped improve cow comfort,” said Meagan Cooney, research manager at Pond Hill Dairy. “We can quickly and easily adjust to changing weather and temperatures outside and provide a more consistent inside environment with improved air circulation.”

Statz Brothers Farm, Marshall, Wis.: Joe, Troy and Wes Statz are in the process of building a new GEA Farm Technologies’ total solutions facility to hold 2,700 cows. The facility is projected to be complete in early November, and is incorporating the latest milking equipment with advanced technologies including a double 50 Magnum 90i VL parallel parlor, FutureCow™ teat prep system, and Metatron 21 meters to name a few, along with three new Norbco 6-row freestall barns outfitted with a complete Houle manure transfer system.

“We put a lot of time and thought into the design of this new facility,” said Joe Statz. “The investments we are making in technology and automation are going to improve our operational efficiencies and help make us more profitable.”

In addition to the dairy tours, visiting producers made a stop at GEA Farm Technologies’ manufacturing plant in Galesville, Wis. Here they took a behind-the-scenes look at the manufacturing and assembly of many of GEA’s products including MIone multi-box automated milking systems, bulk tanks, wash reservoirs and others.

For more information on the Innovation Dairy Tour or to connect with producers from the tour, contact GEA Farm Technologies at 1-877-WS-Dairy (1-877-973-2479).

Source: GEA Farm Technologies

Technology Will Take Livestock Breeding to the Next Level

Selecting and breeding better livestock is about to shift to a whole new playing field. It will be a lot less about how the animals look to your eye and much more about the secrets in their genes.

A single drop of blood or one hair follicle will tell you – maybe with as much as 70% accuracy – if a calf or a pig has extra disease resistance, gains weight on less feed, or can sire offspring with more tender meat. Using this information to assist in decisions about an animal’s breeding potential or its best use in the food chain will become more commonplace as we learn more about specific gene combinations and what they tell us.

Increased efficiency of animal and meat production will be a big part of this focus, says Max Rothschild, an animal genetics professor and specialist at Iowa State University. “We have a first draft of the genomic sequencing for all species of livestock. We are learning what individual genes do,” he says. “Our eventual goal is to determine what they do to help us design animals.”

As an example, he says, you may select cattle that have tender meat even though they are only grass-fed because the genes tell us the animal is capable of that. Or, you’ll identify pigs with more tender pork for an exclusive upscale market.

Jerry Taylor, a professor of animal genomics at the University of Missouri, calls the testing for specific genes that predict animal performance “the holy grail” of the industry.

“It will become a cost-effective way to genotype animals for a number of traits that we like to measure, such as weights and growth and carcass traits, and even feed intake and conversion,” he says. “The key phrase is cost-
effective. What genetic information can we get that will give us information that is an effective predictor?”

He reminds livestock producers that using genetic selection tools won’t eliminate the need to measure animal phenotypes such as growth rate or fertility traits.

“The genome technology may never be to the point that we can explain 100% of the variation by genotype. That’s why it’s vitally important that livestock breeders and producers continue to record data on animals.”

Seedstock and commercial livestock producers will use the new barrage of genetic information, Taylor says.

“You will give the information to customers such as cattle feedlots and other livestock breeders. Once it all becomes clear how to use this information, it will give extra value to some animals,” he says.

Taylor lists several ways this new round of livestock genetic technology may be used. Low-cost tests will be developed that predict the genetic merit of animals for growth, feed efficiency, marbling score, and resistance to respiratory disease. The best heifer replacements will be identified for fertility, calving ease, and milking ability. As the remaining animals are sold to sale barns or feedlots, their genetic information will accompany each animal to enable the feedlot to feed them to different end points or for different customers.

“Of course, the feedlot would need to pay for this information,” Taylor says.

Rothschild says it is important to note that what we do with livestock genetics isn’t genetic modification in the same sense as in crop GMOs, where new genes are inserted into plant cells. Rather, it’s selecting for the genes that are already present in a species; the ones that produce the desired results.

“It’s doing things that occur naturally as we have been doing for years,” he says. “We’re just selecting animals using gene-based tools.”

What it costs
DNA testing comes in different forms, says Taylor. “We can test single points in the genome, such as for a genetic defect. Or, we can test all of them if we sequence an animal. The costs vary from $10 to about $5,000 for full sequencing. The costs will come down in the future, but we really need some competition in the technology marketplace for that to happen.

“DNA testing to predict genetic merit for complex traits like feed efficiency is still a little too expensive for the technology to have taken off in a major way in the beef industry,” he says.

Taylor advises livestock farmers not to get left behind. “Putting your head in the sand won’t make technology go away. If you do that, others will embrace it, and your economic competitiveness will decrease. You don’t want to be on the outside looking in,” he says.

Who are the players?
A lot of the animal genomic technology is being developed at universities in collaboration with breed associations, says Jerry Taylor. This is the prediction equation side of the business, he explains, or figuring out how to convert the known genotypes into a predictable expected difference. (For example, if a certain version of a gene is present, you can expect an extra 2.6 pounds of weight gain.)

He lists these companies as being on the cutting edge of developing the technologies to produce the genotyping tools:
Illumina
Affymetrix
Eureka Genomics
Life Technologies

The companies that are involved in developing the specific assays that deliver the technology to the livestock industry and also specific tools to address the needs of the different end-users include:
GeneSeek/Neogen
Zoetis

Source: Agriculture.com

GMO’s – It’s a political issue!

On November 4th the issue of GMOs made it to the USA ballot box. For the first time Colorado, Oregon, Hawaii and California placed the question of GMOs before the electorate. Although the results didn’t rise to the same headline level given to the Republicans winning control of the Senate, many hurried to put their spin on the outcome.

The Actual Results of Four Votes

Initiatives requiring labels for genetically altered food were defeated in Colorado and Oregon. Voters in Hawaii and California adopted two county level bans on the production of genetically modified organisms. Does that make it a tie?

Here is a Closer Look

  1. Voters strongly rejected Proposition 105, which would have mandated labeling for genetically modified foods.
  2. The vote was much closer in Oregon, but Measure 92 still failed.
  3. Maui County, Hawaii. A ballot measure slapping a temporary ban on genetically engineered crops passed by a slim margin. The new law will prohibit the growth, testing, or cultivation of GMOs until environmental and health studies declare them safe.
  4. Humboldt County, California. Voters handily approved Measure P, which will prohibit growing genetically modified crops in the northern California County.

Looking at GMOs from Both Sides Now

Hawaiian opponents to the proposed law, which included agribusinesses and family farmers, called the law flawed and said it would hurt the local economy. Indeed, the GMO seed corn industry on Molokai Island, which is part of Maui County, may be threatened as a result of the election. But supporters, who were reportedly outspent by more than 87 to 1, hailed the result. “Residents of Hawaii are acutely aware of their islands’ ecological uniqueness, and they are willing to stand up to chemical companies to ensure that biodiversity is protected,” said Ashley Lukens of the Hawaii chapter of the Center for Food Safety.

Everybody is Claiming Victory

Regardless of the outcome, both sides are claiming victory.  This alone should signal that something irregular is at work here! Those in support of GMOs claim science won.  Those anti-GMOs say that million dollar campaigns made the difference.

Can’t Get Respect

You have often read here in The Bullvine that it is hard for farmers to be accorded respect for the 24/7 labor they put into food production.  However relative to GMOs, the real lack of respect is being given to the food consumer.  GMO activists see them not only as being easily manipulated by the big money interests, they are apparently unable, without threats and manipulation, to make healthy choices when feeding themselves and their families.  Of course, farmers don’t eat the food they produce or so anti-GMO activists would have the public believe.  Anti-GMO activists find that farmers are somehow immune to the deadly effects of something that would kill not only the animals that provide their living but themselves too!  These poor farmers simply don’t know any better!!

Finger Pointing at the Villains

Of course when any discussion descends to shouting and name calling, it is less and less likely that something beneficial to anybody will be the end result.  No one has a perfect answer. Extremists are lined up on both sides of the issues.  Agricultural is frustrated with misinformation.  From their viewpoint, ballot initiatives at the state level seem misguided at best and fear mongering at worst. With barn boots dug in, they are as unbending as the anti-activists who can only rally the cries driven by fear and mistrust.

“It is time to step back and choose elected leaders — from both viewpoints—who are willing to work together to find solutions.”

History Repeats Itself

The results in Colorado and Oregon follow similar ballot initiative defeats in California in 2012 and in Washington State in 2013. The food industry spent nearly $70 million to thwart those efforts.  The expenditure is not seen as information or education but, negatively, as brain-washing.

Put a Label On It

Now, legislative action around GMOs may shift to Congress, which will see Republicans take control of the Senate and expand their control of the House in the new year. A GOP-led Congress could add momentum to the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act. The bill was authored by the food industry and proposes voluntary GMO labeling nationwide.  It would preclude states from adopting their own mandatory labeling laws. The nominally bipartisan bill has had few co-sponsors, but a more business-friendly Washington could give it new life.

What in The World???

Genetically engineered foods must be labeled as such in 64 countries, but in the United States only Vermont has approved labels. Even there, the law doesn’t take effect until July 2016—if it can withstand legal challenges. Maine and Connecticut also have passed GMO labeling bills, but both remain dormant unless and until other states also pass similar legislation. Legislation to label genetically altered food has been introduced in 20 states.

From the Feed Box to the Ballot Box Which Way are the Tides Turning?

Despite the setbacks for GMO opponents, public distrust of genetically modified foods seems to be growing. And companies that make and sell food are paying attention. One example which is held up is that General Mills changed the recipe for Cheerios.  This was so that the product would no longer include genetically modified ingredients.  Another national retailer (Whole Foods) plans to label genetically altered products by 2018.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

So what does this mean for the dairy industry? The world of labeling products is changing. Consumers have the right to know what they put in their bodies.

Our industry needs to be proactive in the face of changing perspectives. Instead of fighting are we prepared to show that using GMOs is one way – one safe way – that we may be able to feed nine billion in 2050 and our milk products are not negatively impacted by GMOs.

Sitting on the fence is not an effective way to think outside the GMO ballot box.  

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

Technology update from World Dairy Expo

In early October, I had the opportunity to spend some time in the ‘Center of the Dairy Universe’, i.e. World Dairy Expo in Madison, WI. There was so much to see; pretty cows, yes, but also all the exhibitor booths, where I spent most of my time. I am mostly attracted to the newest precision and automation technologies, interspersed amongst everything else. As one exhibitor of precision feeding equipment mentioned to me, it is kind of hard to find these technology products with so many other things to see here. This reminds me to mention to please mark your calendars for the 2015 Precision Dairy Conference and Expo which will be a lot more specific to those technology companies. Dates are June 24-25, 2015.

If you read the list of 2014 Dairy Innovation Awards, you saw some of these technologies mentioned, which include cow behavior monitoring devices, hand-held scanning device for feed moisture analysis, creating an pre- and post-dip on-farm production plant, manure nutrient separation system, diversion system for milk according to components, apps for better management of robotic milking systems, and more. Details can be found here. Of course, there were a lot more technologies yet… exciting times!

As I mention robotic milking, I would like to summarize here some key points I made during my talk ‘Milking with Robots: How is it Done? Part II’ presented on October 2. More than 50% of the attendees indicated that they were interested in or planning to install robots in the future.

So, what are important things to consider if you are interested in using this technology?

  • Do you or your employees like working with cows? Let me tell you a secret: If you install a robotic milking system (RMS), you still need to work hard and pay close attention to your cows. We have seen in our research that the most successful producers enjoy working with cows and don’t have the attitude of putting a robot in the barn and leaving cows to their own. Barn and stalls need to be cleaned daily, cows bred and treated, cows fetched, cows fed, etc. It just makes one chore – the tedious milking chore – easier since you don’t have to do it yourself, giving you more work time flexibility. That is very helpful especially for smaller operations run with family labor.
  • Do you have the best ration/feeding management? How and what cows are fed in a RMS farm is one of the most important keys for success. We learned from a dairy producer in Pennsylvania that daily average milk production on his farm went from about 60 to 80 pounds per cow by changing ration formulation and feeding management under the advice of an expert RMS nutritionist. It is important to balance the partial mixed ration that goes in the feed bunk to less than the average daily milk production goal per cow then supplement cows according to stage of lactation with the robot pellet. The robot pellet needs to be palatable, as it attracts cows to the milking station. So, do you have a trained/expert nutritionist to work with you?
  • How is your barn? Comfortable? Properly designed? As you know, I am all for good cow comfort in any dairy system. For RMS, it is even more important that cows are healthy and willing to come to the milking station, so for example, a high prevalence of lameness will probably increase the number of fetch cows and reduce efficiency of the robot. It is necessary to have good cow flow (be it free or guided) so that we don’t hinder attendance to the robot. You also need to think about how to design the barn to accommodate special needs cows and make your life easier when managing/treating them.
  • Are you handy with equipment? These systems are hi-tech and expensive. If you can learn how to fix little things, it will help make RMS more affordable to you in the long run and reduce the number of failures and problems that can affect robot efficiency. A key factor for success in RMS farms is the amount of milk produced per robot per day. Excellent dairies are getting 5,000+ pounds per day.
  • Is the service provider nearby? For major repairs and routine maintenance, it is important to have a company within a certain radius. If the RMS breaks down for a long period of time, things can get really out of control and create a ‘train wreck’ very fast. You depend on that one unit to milk 60 to 70 cows and you only have the one unit for that number of cows (and probably more if you have a multiple box system). Keep it at top performance!
  • Do you like technology? Get the most out of it. There is so much information about every cow that you can use to optimize performance and health. RMS companies are developing even more decision making tools that will help organize your day and create a task list every morning.
  • Are you ready to pay for the cost of repairs and maintenance (and your loan)? A sophisticated piece of equipment requires money to maintain and repair. You can’t just go to the local hardware store to get all the parts you need. Please be financially prepared.
  • Do you have strong management skills? As one of our successful project collaborators, Doug Kastenschmidt, said: “Management makes milk. Robots only harvest it!”

Source: UMN Extension

Best Practices when Buying New Technology for Your Dairy Operation

Last week, while, at World Dairy Expo, I took the opportunity to attend a seminar presented by Jeffrey Bewley from the University of Kentucky. His topic was New Monitoring Technologies May Help Manage Cow Reproduction and Health. Before Dr. Bewley started I wondered what his take home message would be and if it would have been better for me to attend another seminar on breeding for feed efficiency.  With more than one topic of interest going on simultaneously and not being able to clone myself, it meant that a choice had to be made. I will need to catch up on the materials shared on feed efficiency via electronic means however the ideas shared by Dr. Bewley struck a desirable note for me.

New Technologies Leading Change

Dr. Bewley started his presentation by stating “Technologies are quickly changing the shape of the dairy industry across the globe. In fact, many of the new technologies being applied to the dairy industry are variations of base technologies used in larger industries such as an automobile or personal electronic industries. These new technologies will continue to change the way dairy cattle are managed, bred and fed.”

Dr. Bewley’s presentation focused on numerous devices that are being connected simultaneously to cows in the University of Kentucky herd to measure performance, reproduction and animal health. Individual cows have more than one device attached to them so that the data captured can be inter-related. He strongly stressed that knowing single observations without knowing other measurements on a cow does not make the dairyman’s job easier. In fact, it makes it harder. Lots of data but no way of linking a piece of information from one device to another does not help make better decisions. In Dr. Bewley’s words “data is only useful if it translates into meaningful actions that herd managers can apply”.

Which Device(s) to Invest In?

The number of devices mentioned, by Dr. Bewley that the team at the University of Kentucky are testing was overwhelming. However, Dr. Bewley did provide thoughts on criteria for dairymen to use when deciding on equipment.

Ideal Technology       

  • Must be cost effective not just something that is nice to have.
  • Needs to be flexible, robust and reliable (barns are harsh environments).
  • Best if device is simple to use and the data captured is solutions focused.
  • Information needs to be quickly available and user-friendly.
  • Equipment supplier needs to be available 24/7 to troubleshoot.

Limitations

  • New technology is not a fit for every dairy. Trial it before you buy it.
  • Some devices are brought to market before they are fully field tested.
  • Software is not always user-friendly. Test if it works for you.
  • Some devices are developed and sold without consideration for work patterns on farm.
  • Avoid stand-alone devices that cannot be linked to other on-farm technology.

How to Judge Benefits

  • Will the information produced be more accurate than was previously available?
  • Will the information provided save on labor costs?
  • Will the information provided lead to increased profit per cow per day?
  • Will the information result in improved product quality?
  • When using the device will there be minimal environmental impact?
  • Will your cows be healthier, have improved reproduction and be more profitable?
  • Will managing the herd be easier and less time-consuming?
  • If a device cannot provide at least two of the above benefits then don’t buy it!

Lessons Learned

Dr. Bewley and his team of researchers have focus on Precision Dairy Farming. Some of the lessons they have learned include:

  • Be cautious about buying early stage technologies.
  • Take the time to thoroughly learn how to use the technology and interpret the results.
  • Integrating the data from the various on-farm technologies takes an expert.
  • Having qualified customer service available is crucial.
  • Give priority to buying devices that will have the largest impact on profit.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The application of precision dairy farming technologies is important as herd size increases and margins narrow. A good place to get an objective view on technologies that apply to health and reproduction is the University of Kentucky website. Of course, another good source of information are breeders that have already installed the technology. Ask them both what’s good and what’s not so good about the device. By all means identify where your operation can be improved and then pencil out the cost – benefit of each technology. Applying technology will be a leading contributor to profitability and sustainability on dairy farms in the future.

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

General Mills reject’s resolution for removal of GMO

General Mills shareholders rejected a resolution Tuesday that would have forced removal of genetically-modified organisms from the company’s products.  The proposal, submitted by a descendant of one of General Mills’ founders, called for the company to remove genetically engineered ingredients from products sold or manufactured by the company, according to a news release from the National Center for Public Policy Research.  The resolution was supported with a claim that genetic engineering involves significant risks to the environment, food security, and public health.

General Mills CEO Ken Powell said the company stands by research that shows GMOs are safe.  He affirmed that the company would keep GM ingredients in its remaining Cheerios cereals.  The company announced earlier that its original Cheerios cereal would be produced without GMOs.

The National Center for Public Policy Research issued a news release Monday urging rejection of the proposal.  That group’s spokesman, Justin Danhof said the vote “shows that fact-based scientific consensus can trump emotional appeals that are not tethered to science or reason.”

A tally of the preliminary vote at the meeting showed that more than 97 percent of General Mills shareholders voted against the proposal.

Source: NAFB News Service

Feedstuff Cost Comparison App

SDSU Extension has developed tools to help evaluate the relative costs of two different feedstuffs.

The Feed Cost Calculator is available for both desktop and handheld devices. The desktop version is a spreadsheet that is availabe below. The handheld version developed for both iOS and Android devices is available by clicking the icons below or searching ‘Feed Cost Calculculator’ in either the iTunes App Store or Google Play.

This tool was developed collaboratively by Tracey Renelt and Warren Rusche.

Cells requiring an entry are colored yellow. Estimated values based on current market prices have been entered and will be included in the calculations unless you enter your own values. Users should not adjust cells with a white background.

  • Enter the feed cost per ton.
  • If there will be shipping costs involved, enter the number of miles and cost per mile.
  • When the number of tons per load is entered, the shipping cost per ton will appear. These cells can be left blank if there are no shipping costs, or if shipping is already included in the feed price.
  • The dry matter percentage is critical to accurately evaluate high-moisture feeds vs. dry grains or forages. Enter the DM percentages.
  • Enter the feed analysis values as labeled in each row.
  • Crude protein and TDN should be entered as a percentage (DM basis).
  • The Net Energy values should be entered as Mcal/ pound (DM).
  • The delivered cost per pound or Mcal for the two feedstuffs and the price where Feedstuff #2 equals the value of Feedstuff #1 will appear.

If the breakeven price for Feedstuff #2 is lower than the cost entered for Feedstuff #2, the cell will turn green. In that case, feedstuff #2 is a better buy for that particular nutrient.

You can type your data into the spreadsheet tool here. Your data is not collected or saved in this form. When the page is refreshed, your data will disappear.

By: Warren Rusche, Cow/Calf Field Specialist, SDSU Extension

Polymer Extrusion Technology Announces Crystal Clear Teatcup Liner for Dairy Cows.

UdderOnePolymer Extrusion Technology (PET), a South Florida based company specializing in developing and manufacturing specialty resins and polymers, has developed UdderOne™– a totally new concept in dairy liners, shells, hoses and accessories. Using revolutionary crystal clear polymers and unprecedented technology, UdderOne™ helps in the flight against bacteria spread during the milking process.

UdderOne Steve HowesPET Chief Technology Officer, Steve Howes, says, “after visiting the farms where our test trials were run, I saw the look of surprise on their faces, they all smiled, they’re satisfied and want deliveries now. We couldn’t be more pleased.” Howes says that a dairyman admitted it was the first time he’s really seen a cow milked in “40 years!”

Dairy farmers can now see the full milking of their cows using UdderOne™. No longer “working in the dark,” they can immediately see any abnormalities in the milk stream on each teat during the milk out; from teat to hose. UdderOne™ starts out clear and remains clear.

UdderOne™ was specifically designed to be much kinder to cow teats and to replace the old black and green opaque liners which can contain such things as carbon black and other similar fillers.

An added feature applied to the UdderOne™ product line makes it the world’s first with nano-technology that greatly reduces bacteria growth on the hoses, liners, shells and wash-cups. The technology of UdderOne™ uses the energy of light to produce safe and powerful oxidizers on the product surfaces.


The carefully engineered minerals and polymers used in UdderOne™ products make them hydrophobic, therefore not able to absorb milk or butterfat like some rubber and silicone dairy accessories do. The process enables UdderOne™ to sheet water off; lifting dirt, fats, oils and contaminants off the UdderOne™ products.


Key points of UdderOne™:
• Has met or exceeded the FDA compliance specification for food contact use: 21 CFR 177.2600 (E)
• High tear and abrasion resistance in an extra durable long lasting polymer
• UdderOne™ is Animal Derived Ingredient Free. No Animal derived lubricants that can leach out
• Highly resistant to acids and bases
• Saves dairy farmers money in liner cost per year

From Beakers to Breakthroughs Milk Reveals Its Secrets

The breaking news out of Australia was all about milk. “Unlocking milk’s formula could save lives say scientists” from Monash University.

The opportunities that could (grow) from this study include:

  • New formulas for premature babies
  • Weight loss drinks
  • New drug delivery systems

This ground breaking research was published in the journal ACS Nano, the Monash University For the first time the research goes well beyond the known nutritional values of milk and provides detailed insights into the structure of milk during digestion. This study delves into the detailed structure of milk and how its fats interact with the digestive system.

Research Reveals Interaction of Milk and Digestion

This unique approach to the study of the makeup of milk was funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC). Dr Stefan Salentinig and Professor Ben Boyd from the Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (MIPS) led the team that looked at the nanostructure of milk to find out how its components interact with the human digestive system. Their findings are detailed in the article published in 2013:  Formation of Highly Organized Nanostructures during the Digestion of Milk. The Australian team discovered milk has a highly geometrically ordered structure when being digested. Dr Salentinig said the research provides a blueprint for the development of new milk products. It could also lead to a new system for drug delivery. “By unlocking the detailed structure of milk we have the potential to create milk loaded with fat soluble vitamins and brain building molecules for premature babies, or a drink that slows digestion so people feel fuller for longer. We could even harness milk’s ability as a ‘carrier’ to develop new forms of drug delivery.”

Breakthrough Research is Needed for Dairy Development

The dairy industry urgently requires this kind of breakthrough science that has the potential to improve global health and cure disease. It is easy from the day to day side of milk production to keep scientific research at arm’s length forgetting that it moves the dairy industry forward.The Monash research team recreated the characteristics of the digestive system in a glass beaker. They then added cows’ milk.  They found that “an emulsion of fats, nutrients and water forms a structure which enhances digestion. The breakthrough made by Monash University team was the discovery that milk has a “unique structure” during digestion, which they have described as “similar to a sponge.” In simple terms Salentinig summarizes”We found that when the body starts the digestion process, an enzyme called lipase breaks down the fat molecules to form a highly geometrically ordered structure. These small and highly organized components enable fats, vitamins and lipid-soluble drugs to cross cell membranes and get into the circulatory system.” 

Specialist Instruments Simulate Digestion

The progress in science gains further impetus from the astonishing progress in recent years in medical technology. Collaborations among physical scientists, engineers, and doctors have given us CAT scans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and a wide variety of therapeutic devices.  This was also part of the work in Australia. As well as laboratory work at MIPS, the researchers accessed specialist instruments at the Australian Synchrotron to simulate digestion and accelerate the research. Using enzymes present in the body, water was added to milk fat to break it down, and the Synchrotron’s small angle X-ray scattering beam showed that when digested, the by-products of milk become highly organised. Dr Salentinig said the structure is similar to a sponge, potentially enhancing the absorption of milk’s healthy fats. He further elaborates “We knew about the building blocks of milk and that milk fat has significant influence on the flavor, texture and nutritional value of all dairy food. But what we didn’t know was the structural arrangement of this fat during digestion,” The possibilities promise exciting results. “We could even harness milk’s ability as a ‘carrier’ to develop new forms of drug delivery.”

A Post Genomics Revolution

The dairy world has been changed by the genomics revolution and the practical benefits are more evident all the time. It is important to recognize how strong science provides practical benefits to the dairy industry. However, that strong science cannot exist without support.  It is especially important not to neglect fundamental research. It is from this curiosity-driven, disciplinary research that projects such as the one from Monash can contribute to understanding and real progress for the dairy industry. We need research to lead the way to advances in detection, diagnosis and treatment of dairy diseases and even ways to advance human health prevention, diagnosis and treatment.  Although it is unlikely that science and technology will solve all the problems, it is equally unlikely that they will be solved without research.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

With regards to milk, the next phase of the research studies at Monash University includes working with nutritionists to make stronger links between these new findings and dietary outcomes. Ultimately the plan is to utilize these findings to design and test improved medicines.  The Australian researchers have the vision, commitment, and most importantly, the funding. It only proves that Mother was right, “Don’t cry over spilled milk!”  Instead, we should applaud, encourage and support dairy research, wherever we are.

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

 

Unlocking milk’s formula could save lives, say scientists

A new study on the digestion of milk could lead to the development of new formulas for premature babies, weight loss drinks and potentially new drug delivery systems.

Published in the journal ACS Nano, the Monash University research shows for the first time detailed insights into the structure of milk during digestion.

Whilst milk’s nutritional values are well known, little research has been conducted into the detailed structure of milk and how its fats interact with the digestive system until now.

Funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC), and led by Dr Stefan Salentinig and Professor Ben Boyd from the Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (MIPS), the team looked at the nanostructure of milk to find out how its components interact with the human digestive system.

They discovered milk has a highly geometrically ordered structure when being digested.

Dr Salentinig said the research provides a blueprint for the development of new milk products. It could also lead to a new system for drug delivery.

“By unlocking the detailed structure of milk we have the potential to create milk loaded with fat soluble vitamins and brain building molecules for premature babies, or a drink that slows digestion so people feel fuller for longer. We could even harness milk’s ability as a ‘carrier’ to develop new forms of drug delivery,” Dr Salentinig said.

By chemically recreating the digestive system in a glass beaker and adding cows’ milk, the team found that milk has a unique structure – an emulsion of fats, nutrients and water forms a structure which enhances digestion.

As well as laboratory work at MIPS, the researchers accessed specialist instruments at the Australian Synchrotron to simulate digestion and accelerate the research. Using enzymes present in the body, water was added to milk fat to break it down, and the Synchrotron’s small angle X-ray scattering beam showed that when digested, the by-products of milk become highly organised.

Dr Salentinig said the structure is similar to a sponge, potentially enhancing the absorption of milk’s healthy fats.

“We knew about the building blocks of milk and that milk fat has significant influence on the flavor, texture and nutritional value of all dairy food. But what we didn’t know was the structural arrangement of this fat during digestion,” he said.

“We found that when the body starts the digestion process, an enzyme called lipase breaks down the fat molecules to form a highly geometrically ordered structure. These small and highly organised components enable fats, vitamins and lipid-soluble drugs to cross cell membranes and get into the circulatory system,” Dr Salentinig said.

The next phase of the research will see the team work with nutritionists to better make the link between these new findings and dietary outcomes, and under the ARC funding, utilize these findings to design and test improved medicines.

Source: Monash University

44 Lely Astronaut milking robots to manage dairy farm in Germany

Lely has been commissioned as many as forty-four Lely Astronaut milking robots to be delivered to Osterland Agrar GmbH in Frohburg, in eastern Germany. After installing the milking robots from October until mid of 2015, this dairy farm will become the largest company in the world with robotic milking. Thanks to robotic milking the 2,500 dairy cows on the farm can be controlled and taken care of on an individual cow basis.

Due to the Lely Astronaut robotic milking system there are many factors in large herds that can also be controlled on an individual cow basis; factors that cannot be controlled in a conventionally milked herd. Solving problems with availability of labour and benefits from individual cow management are just two reasons why large dairy farms are becoming more and more aware that the Lely Astronaut robotic milking system ensures the best return on investment.

For Osterland Agrar this Lely Dairy XL concept and the good experiences they have with Lely robots were deciding factor to choose for Lely. The robots will be posted in six new barns.

Region Saxony
Besides this large order in this region two other major projects have been realized in Saxony as well. One of 16 milking robots for 1000 cows and three Lely Juno feed pushers (so as to achieve a significantly more efficient use of the daily feed intake of cows). And another project with 21 Lely Astronaut A4 milking robots.

According to Gunnar Althoff, head of the Lely Center Saxony, this development is a confirmation of the Lely Dairy – XL – concept in the area of Lely Center Saxony: “Three of the four largest companies in the world with milking robots are located in this region. Through innovative, profitable robot technology and thanks to the practical and customizable large dairy concept, the Lely Astronaut A4 has now become a profitable alternative to automatic or conventional carousel milking at larger companies.”

The World’s Largest Dairy Spray Dryer Completes Its First Season

Inside the Darfield plant. To the left is the drying chamber of the world largest dairy spray dryer. In the back is one of the plant’s four bag filters.

With the end of the milking season in New Zealand the world’s largest dairy spray dryer has successfully completed its first season. Fonterra’s 30 ton/hour milk powder plant at Darfield, New Zealand, has been in full operation since being started up in August 2013.

From the time it was announced that Fonterra had awarded GEA Process Engineering the contract to build this milestone dairy spray dryer it has attracted great interest in the industry. The dryer, Darfield D2, is the second of two at Fonterra’s Darfield milk processing site in New Zealand and has the capacity to convert around four and a half million litres of fresh liquid milk into milk powder each day.

Clint Brown, Managing Director for GEA Process Engineering in New Zealand, explains what makes the plant so special: ‘It is truly a modern plant designed to be the most efficient in the industry – in terms of Overall Equipment Efficiency, waste minimization and energy consumption – and to meet Fonterra’s need for processing capacity’. Prior to Darfield D2 this capacity could not be achieved on a single dryer. To accomplish the challenge a huge effort was made during the design phase to examine and optimize all components for the complete process line using the latest knowledge in milk powder and process technology. Advanced CFD modelling techniques were then used to further optimize and confirm the design for all critical parts.

Darfield D2 was commissioned in August 2013 for the start of the New Zealand milking season, has been in almost continuous production over the last nine month, and has now concluded its first year of operation. At the peak of the season the dryer produced more than 700 tons of milk powder each day. According to Richard Gray, Fonterra’s Operations Manager for the Canterbury region, the first season has been a success: ‘The drier commissioning was very successful, and we saw continued plant performance through the first operational season. The collaborative relationship between GEA and Fonterra set the foundation for a great project and great plant. Drier 2 at Darfield plays an important role in Fonterra’s strategy to meet the strong demand for dairy nutrition around the world.’

Facts
Fonterra’s Darfield site is located 45 km from Christchurch, New Zealand. The site includes two milk powder spray drying plants both built by GEA. The first was put into operation in 2012 with a capacity of 15 tons/hour and the second, Darfield D2, was completed a year later with a capacity of 30 tons/hour.

GEA Process Engineering has supplied a complete process plant solution at Darfield, drawing on the company’s scope of dairy process technologies and components – ranging from the tanker unloading through milk standardization, evaporation and drying, to powder transport and packing.

Read more about Darfield at Fonterra.com
Read more about GEA’s complete plant solutions

Genetically modified grass for dairy cows sparks concern

Wendy and Peter Wallace, organic farmers in Ellinbank, near Warragul, who are concerned over trials of genetically modified rye grass. Photo: Jason South

A plan to feed Australian dairy cows  genetically modified rye grass designed to boost milk production has sparked concerns from both organic and non-organic farmers.

Opponents of the scheme fear that GM grasses could contaminate neighbouring properties and that existing labelling requirements would not allow consumers to identify products made from cows fed on the modified rye.

Greg Paynter, of the Organic Federation of Australia, said the role of GM grasses in the food chain was “a sleeping giant”.

“We’ll have humans consuming milk from cows that have been consuming genetically modified material. We just don’t know what effects we might have to deal with in the future.

“They’re talking about scientific testing but the natural processes and ecosystems have been tested over 3 billion years.”

Ben Copeman, general manager of the National Association for Sustainable Agriculture Australia,  said while organic producers had to follow strict labelling requirements, the same rules did not apply to products with GM crops in their food chain, potentially leaving consumers unaware. Mr Copeman also said many of Australia’s important grain customers, such as Japan, China and Korea, did not want GM in their food chains and had zero tolerance to GM contamination.

While GM rye is unlikely to be available until 2020, a long-term research project into the potential benefits of the grass has moved to its next stage, including looking at regulatory requirements, after more than six years spent developing new varieties of pasture.

News of the work at the Dairy Futures Co-operative Research Centre  follows controversy over a landmark WA Supreme Court ruling in May, that  dismissed an organic farmer’s claim that his land had been contaminated by GM canola grown by his neighbour, a conventional farmer.

Kojonup organic farmer Steve Marsh this week announced he would appeal against the court’s ruling. The original case centred on Mr Marsh’s bid to sue neighbour Michael Baxter, alleging he had lost organic certification for more than half his farm after GM canola drifted onto his land from Mr Baxter’s property.

NASAA, which withdrew Mr Marsh’s organic certification, welcomed the appeal, saying both conventional and organic farmers had the right to grow crops without contamination from GM materials.

“The original decision has the potential to affect the vast majority of Australia’s conventional growers who choose not to grow GM as well as certified organic farmers,” Mr Copeman said. “On behalf of all organic producers and consumers, NASAA has drawn a line in the sand on the issue of GM in the organic food chain because our markets demand a zero tolerance of GM. In addition, both farmers and consumers have the right to choose what they grow and what they eat.”

The subject of GM modified food and crops in Australia continues to spark debate. There are 0.7 million hectares of GM cotton and canola grown in Australia, with canola the biggest GM crop in Victoria. But there are moratoriums on all GM crops in the ACT and Tasmania and limited bans in the other states.

Paula Fitzgerald, manager of biotechnology and strategic initiatives at Dairy Australia, and the Dairy Futures CRC spokeswoman, said GM rye grass would not be commercially available before 2020, with a huge amount of scientific work and industry considerations to be worked through.

Earlier this year, a report on the work of the CRC, which is jointly funded by the Victorian government and industry body Dairy Australia, was published in a prestigious peer-reviewed journal.

“Up to date we have been developing these new rye grass varieties and assessing whether they are high energy. From there the work would have to go through a number of other stages in terms of regulatory approval and more trials,” she said.

Ms Fitzgerald said GM rye grass could mean an extra $250-300 dollars per hectare of value to farmers, by delivering higher milk yields. She said there had been a lot of interest in the pasture and its potential to help dairy farmers meet growing demand from Asia.

Concern over GM crops often centres on the likelihood of GM materials spreading to nearby farms and this is of particular concern with rye grass, which can be carried on pollen and therefore spreads across a far larger area. But Ms Fitzgerald said this issue had been carefully considered with GM canola, particularly the potential for it to be carried with pollen, and it had been resolved to the regulator’s satisfaction.

She said as work on GM rye grass progressed there would be “a dialogue” with the dairy industry over its effect on the whole supply chain.

Organic honey producer David Seymour, who sources honey from 16 farms in Victoria, said any contact with GM rye grass would put him out of business.

Mr Seymour said that to maintain his organic certification there had to be no “adverse farming activities” within a five kilometre radius.

Dairy Australia is already working hard to win the public relations battle over GM crops, with recent reports in regional media about DA’s bid to develop “farming heroes” – individuals who would help spread a positive message about GM crops among local farming communities.

Source: The Sydney Morning Herald

Iowa State University veterinary researchers use forensic technology to track down drug residues in milk

Veterinarians at Iowa State University are using advanced forensic techniques and the same technology used by crime scene investigators to monitor drug residues in milk and meat.

The ISU researchers work with other veterinarians and producers to strengthen food safety and make sure animals are medicated properly.

“It’s the same instrumentation used for forensics testing in humans,” said Hans Coetzee, a professor of veterinary diagnostic and production animal medicine. “But we use it to test for drugs in animals.”

Coetzee leads the Pharmacology Analytical Support Team (PhAST) in the ISU Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory. He and his team employ liquid chromatography mass spectrometry, an analytical chemistry technique commonly used in human pharmacology, to test dozens of milk and animal feed samples every month.

The team’s mission is to help local veterinarians and farmers make sure the meat and milk they produce satisfy FDA regulations governing the use of antibiotics and are safe for human consumption.

Growing awareness

Patrick Gorden, a senior clinician in veterinary diagnostic and production animal medicine, said the use of antibiotics in production animals has taken on greater importance as consumer awareness of food safety has grown in recent years.

Gorden said the use of antibiotics and other medications in production animals may lead to the possibility of violative levels of the medications being present when the milk and meat are offered for sale. In most cases, that happens because of mistakes in record keeping or animal handling, he said.

“It’s important to realize that mistakes can happen and that safeguards are in place to prevent those contaminated products from reaching the consumer,” Gorden said.

Gorden works with veterinarians, producers and inspectors to keep everyone up to date on the latest regulations and federal programs, developing educational materials and holding meetings across the state.

“Meat and milk are safe to consume, and the monitoring process is being continuously improved,” Gorden said.

Every load of milk is tested for the presence of medicines at or above FDA limits before it’s unloaded and processed. Of all milk tankers tested nationwide between October 2012 and September 2013, only 0.014 percent showed antibiotic levels above FDA limits.

All milk found to contain medicines above FDA limits is removed from the supply and destroyed, Gorden said.

From racehorses to milk samples

The PhAST laboratory started out in the 1980s testing racehorses for illegal substances. The lab still does testing for horse and dog racing, but its mission has shifted toward testing milk and feed samples for drug residues in the last few years, which requires the same sort of equipment and expertise as testing for racetracks, Coetzee said. The team tests around 50 milk samples and 100 feed samples in an average month, he said.

The samples are sent to the lab from local veterinarians for several reasons, Coetzee said. For instance, a veterinarian may suspect that a dairy cow was mistakenly given an incorrect medication. Milk samples from the cow would be frozen and sent overnight to the lab, where PhAST personnel use chemical extraction techniques to strip away the fats and proteins from the milk, leaving only the drug signature.

It’s the only veterinary diagnostic lab in the United States that offers such clinical pharmacology services, so the lab has attracted clients from across the country.  And the PhAST team is expanding its services to include testing for oral fluids from pigs, a move supported by a grant from the National Pork Board.

“It’s unique in terms of the services commonly offered by veterinary diagnostic labs,” Coetzee said.

Source: Iowa State University

Internal smart pill to save the dairy industry $10bn

A New York Angels-backed pilot is saving the agricultural industry a predicted $10bn by monitoring the health of animals by a sensor-enabled smart pill.

A US defence pilot project monitoring dairy cow’s vital signs via a smart pill will save the agricultural industry an estimated $10bn in mortality and morbidity costs. The 4” x 1.5” pill – essentially multi-purpose environmental monitor – is swallowed and remains in the animal’s stomach where it measures a variety of parameters that may affect its health such as breathing, heart rate, temperature and PH levels in the stomach.

The technology owes its success in part to the unique design of the bovine digestion system. Vital Herd has exploited the cow’s famous alkaline fourth stomach called the remun, of which the pill drops to the bottom and is unable to pass through. The pill remains here and transmits data back to the farmer, vet or nutritionist for analysis, creating a baseline profile on each individual animal. “We’d love to exploit the race-horse environment which would be very lucrative, but race horses only have one stomach, so the pill would be regurgitated or simply pass through their digestive system,” said Brian Walsh, the CEO of Vital Herd at the Internet of Things conference PTCLive today.

But Vital Herd is far from the first to monitor the health of cows from the inside. “Plenty of companies have sensors that monitor one parameter, such as heat, from inside the animal,” he says. “People have been putting magnets in the stomachs of cattle for years to anchor the barbed wire and nails that cows consume on a regular basis. What makes our technology different is that we measure a variety of parameters, temperature, heart rate and rumen PH levels.”

Unlike their competitors, Vital Herd’s pill monitors via patented acoustic sonar rather than electronically, which can help diagnose sickness such as lameness and mastitis. The smart-farming technology uses an Internet of Things-led M2M application called Thingworx which provides a platform for various connected devices to talk to each other and collect data, via PLM solution provider PTC.

The key benefit to farmers is the technology’s scalability, which can be applied to five animals or 500. The current pilot project is monitoring five cows, but Walsh says data could be mined from a whole herd of cattle which can often reach 1,000 animals.

Its other benefit is remote monitoring. Farms are often located in remote areas, far from vets or nutritionists. Much like remote monitoring in a factory environment, nutritionists or vets can predict the health of a herd before fatality, meaning they can reach an animal before an illness leads to death. “We estimate farmers will achieve a 4x return on their investment per year,” says Walsh.

This technology could transform the food security industry by preventing bad meat reaching the marketplace – and eventually our food – as contaminated meat could be traced directly back to a specific farmer and cow. Reduction in sickness levels could also allay recent concerns regarding the effect of antibiotics delivered over the lifetime of the cow on meat.

The technology has other applications outside of agriculture. Essentially an acoustic fermenter monitor, the pill could be used in biofuel production or wastewater industries which would benefit from fermenting monitoring.

Increased dairy production in recent years has produced higher milk yields to meet demand, but it also causes animals to become more susceptible to sickness, produces a narrower fertility window in heifers and contributes extensively to global warming. “The benefits are sustainability-related as well as health related,” says Walsh. “A cow that is processing its food efficiently produces less methane, which means less contribution to climate change. We believe something has to happen, something has to change.”

For more information visit www.vitalherd.com or www.thingworx.com

Source: Engineering and Technology Magazine

DAIRY FARMERS are BRIDGING THE APP-GAP!

Remember when you thought microwaves were something you would never use and that Captain Kirk and Star Trek were beyond reality? Are you one of the Baby Boomers who claims to do without all the handheld gadgets and modern technology?  Then you are probably one of the Baby Boomers who isn’t also a farmer. Today modern dairy farmers of ALL ages are quite happy to hold the future in the palm of their hands.  They email, calculate, talk, text, video, chat and surf the web and look after calves, cows and crops with real time information and alerts that they access using their smartphones.

There are already thousands of apps which have been developed to assist in easier data recording, more accurate records, saving time and remote decision making. Dairy farmers are using smartphones or other mobile devices to increase efficiency and generate higher profits — a challenge in an industry beset by high input costs, low margins and continual uncertainty from Mother Nature.

Here’s a few Iphone, IPad and Android Mobil Phone APPS that meet farmer needs.

  • DTN/The Progressive Farmer. This robust app puts weather data, market data, grain prices, ag news and videos in the hands of the users.
  • Group dynamics: The data collected can indicate whether there is enough food available for the cows
  • PocketDairy is an Android-based app from Dairy Records Management Systems used to access herd records stored in the farm’s PCDART record-keeping system. The mobile app syncs wirelessly with the office computer that stores the records data can be retrieved anytime, anywhere.
  • PSU Dairy Cents is a mobile app offering two features – a quick calculation of income over feed costs and price comparison of various forages, grains and commodities to the Penn State Feed Price List and other users of the database.
  • Target Date calculates the amount of time between two dates.  Users can also choose to ignore weekends and holidays. This app is also useful for estimating livestock births or how many days until harvest.
  • Weather Bug gives users access to live radar, extended forecasts and weather alerts. They can also spy on the weather through more than 2,000 weather cameras located throughout the U.S. Another useful feature is Weather Bug’s GPS capabilities. It allows the app to share weather news relevant to the user’s current location.

Phone apps are appealing for farmers because of the instant access they provide to information and communication, whether from the barn, the field or on the road. The use of RFID technology is nothing new in farming, but it has traditionally been used to track animals as they move from farm to farm and into the food chain, and to prevent theft.  These recent applications however are active rather than passive – they transmit signals rather than waiting to be read. For instance, an app can let farm managers track the movement of every animal in the herd. Having such easily accessible and complete information is the perfect impetus to make management changes … save time … and save money. No wonder dairy farmers are developing app-titude!

APPs contribute to Cheaper, Safer Products

While farmers can gain immediate benefit from their smartphones and the burgeoning app market, the impact such technology holds could extend beyond the field or barnyard. It not only is helping to grow a better product and do so more efficiently, it is also helping to keep costs down and thereby benefiting the consumer too. Even more important, is that technology is contributing to providing a safer product as well. For example, consider how a robotic milker can sense through a cow’s temperature that the animal is sick. Without antibiotics, a program of separation and treatment can be initiated (without antibiotics) that keeps all of that stuff out of the food chain.  Mobile technology allows the farmer to break free of cables and cords and notebooks. Furthermore, the detail and efficiency of this small but effective technology not only helps on the production end of the spectrum but social media tools such as Twitter help in reaching out to consumers by giving them the opportunity to ask farmers questions about production. It is a win-win for both sides.  Information is available wherever and whenever -24/7.

What is the Impact?

Float Mobile Learning, a consulting firm that develops mobile strategies and apps for major agricultural organizations and Fortune 500 companies, has used previous market research to determine that 94% of farmers own a smartphone or a mobile phone. Four years ago, nearly half of American farmers were using a smartphone such as an Android or iPhone, up from 10% in 2010. Many others had tablets like the popular iPad.

What is the Difference?

Personally, I love the fact that recently a local farmer was able to watch his son compete in figure skating even though he himself was home working on the farm. Even better are the times when he can monitor the dairy herd while actually attending events where his children develop skills that he would have missed before the development of this technology.  The benefits of increased efficiency and saving money are well-documented and appreciated.  With a few touches on their iPad, a farmer can now turn on the fans remotely or observe a calving pen or have a quick check-in with the milking team.  However, even more gratifying is the way app technology contributes to solving various issues.  Perhaps it’s an animal health problem – “Hey! What does this look like to you?”  By snapping a quick photo with a smart phone and sending it to someone who can provide the answer, a speedy solution is sought and found.

The benefits of technology extend beyond the farm as well.

Farmers realize information is power in making decisions and they are quick to adapt when they see the value. Farmers are not afraid to use social media to communicate with the public and correct misperceptions or answer questions that consumers may have about agriculture. Farmers and ranchers across the country regularly turn to Twitter, YouTube and other media to compare stories, keep updated on new techniques and equipment being used and trade advice.

From Imagined Possibility to Real Time Speed

So much of the logistics of raising dairy animals happens in slow time.  The opportunity to excel comes when information can be collected and acted upon very quickly. Via real time alerts delivered to his smarpthone a dairy manager can know whether the cow is ill, or is in heat and ready to be inseminated.  Well before having to deal with full blown illness, a tracking app can let managers know two whole days before it can be seen by observation that the cow is sick.  If you can help the cows two days before, it’s money, because the cow, not being so sick, is easier to treat.  In one application, each cow wears a special collar, fitted with a wireless RTLS (real time locating system) tag.  The tags are read several times a second by sensors fitted in a grid in the roof of the barn. The data is sent from the sensors to a hub, where the cow’s every movement is collated and analysed using complex behavioral algorithms.

Coming Soon to Fingertips Near You

Software is being developed that will allow farmers to compare their operations with those of other app users. More information.  More informed decisions. Also, when Thermal Aid is released this fall, developers at the University of Missouri think they can help dairies avoid losses due to heat stress. They’ve produced a new mobile app that can detect the threat of heat stress in cows using nothing more than a smart phone. Much can be learned from Apps that track aspects such as temperature or habitual activity (laying down, sleeping, and eating). When coming into heat cattle typically walk more, socialize more … eat less due to increased activity … and therefore an app that signals these changes in behavior assists heat detection.  Likewise a lack of activity can indicate illness of lameness.

Around the World Apps are Awesome for Working with Cows

A quick surf review of the interview turns up many apps that are being used by dairies around the world.

  • Denmark:  CowView uses a type of RFID (radio frequency identification) called UWB (ultra-wideband) technology.
  • Ireland:  SmartFarm Apps – “Keep your farm in your pocket”
  • New Zealand:  Here I found numerous lists of apps. One is a Dairy Farm Grazing calculator.
  • The Netherlands: LelyT4C In Herd “Farm Management in the Palm of Your Hand”

The Bullvine Bottom Line

It doesn’t come down to whether you should use Apps or not but, more importantly, the question is “Which ones?” Of course it all depends on your individual dairy needs and personal preferences. When you have that figured out, you will definitely find the right app-titude for dairying in the 21st Century.

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

DairyNZ lauches seven-year research to deliver dairy cows that are genetically more fertile

Fertility research seeks biological breakthrough.

A new seven-year research study is underway to deliver dairy cows that are genetically more fertile. If successful, the study could deliver an estimated $500 million national increase in on-farm profit each year.

The research study also aims to deliver new management tools to help farmers take advantage of the better genetic makeup.

DairyNZ senior scientist and project leader Dr Chris Burke says the study requires a purpose-built herd of 700 holstein-friesian heifer calves with low and high fertility attributes, created from carefully-selected contract matings in spring 2014.

“More than 2800 contract matings will be required and we need the support of dairy farmers to ensure that we are able to achieve the required number of animals,” says Chris.

LIC and CRV Ambreed are supporting the establishment of this research herd, with LIC managing the contract mating programme. LIC will start contacting more than 1000 selected dairy farmers during the last week of May.

Cow fertility is fundamental to dairy farm productivity, with the goal to get as many cows as possible in-calf in the first six weeks.

“More cows in-calf means more milk in the vat before Christmas, fewer replacements required, more flexibility when making culling decisions to improve herds and better returns overall for dairy farmers,” says Chris.

The research programme aims to lift the six-week in-calf rate from the current average of 65 percent to 78 percent. Achieving this would deliver an estimated annual increase in profit of $500 million.

“This is a challenging target that cannot be achieved using current knowledge and technologies alone,” says Chris. “A biological breakthrough is required.

“The research herd will help us to unravel the underlying biology that differentiates genetically fertile cows from infertile cows. The programme has assembled some of the best scientists in New Zealand and Australia to work together with this research herd.”

The fertility programme’s biggest challenge is reducing the apparent 30 percent of conceptions occurring in the first 35 days after insemination that are not sustained as a pregnancy.

The magnitude, timing and possible reasons for pregnancy failure in commercially-operated herds will be measured.

This has not been done previously and will be a major collaborative effort between DairyNZ, AgResearch and Fonterra, says Chris.

The fertility research programme also aims to increase the power to select for improved fertility genotypes through use of novel phenotypes (new ways to measure fertility for selection purposes), improved recording and enhanced statistical analysis models.

The cow fertility research programme is part of a partnership programme with matched co-funding from DairyNZ and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). Additional funding and resources will be provided by AgResearch, Fonterra, LIC and CRV Ambreed.

The research will be led by DairyNZ’s Dr Chris Burke and, along with other scientists from DairyNZ, involves internationally-recognised science teams from AgResearch, University of Victoria-Wellington, University of Queensland, Cognosco (a division of Anexa Animal Health), New Zealand Animal Evaluation Ltd and genetics research company AbacusBio.

Source: DairyNZ

Lely Improves Service in the Field Using RightAnswers Mobile Self-Service

Lely revolutionized the dairy industry by introducing automated milking machines. Today it maintains its leadership position by focusing on customer service on a wide variety of products and services: from milking robots to feeding systems to grassland and stable maintenance.

Maintaining high milk yield and quality requires consistent milking intervals. Therefore, any delays in milking can impact the dairy farmer’s product and profits. To minimize downtime of milking robots due to maintenance or repairs, Lely required a way to centralize its knowledge and provide information to engineers in the field through mobile self-service.

InfraVision, an IT Service Management consultancy company and RightAnswers reseller, introduced RightAnswers to Lely as a platform that would address all their knowledge needs.

“Using RightAnswers, our field technicians can access information about our products very quickly and easily, enabling them to troubleshoot our customers’ systems efficiently and keep them running. This is a key function of knowledge at our company,” says Arthur Marck, Lely.

Major reasons Lely selected RightAnswers to manage its knowledge:

  • Mobile self-service, for access to the knowledgebase in locations without internet connectivity
  • Client Success program that works closely with the customer to tailor a solution to its needs
  • RightAnswers best practices on knowledge creation and structure
  • Ability to limit access to information by audience (Lely initially defined 40 different audience types)
  • Ability to make knowledge available to dealers, partners and consultants, to provide the best advice to their customers
  • Integration with Lely’s existing ITSM system

 

About the Lely Group
Since 1948, Lely directs all its efforts towards creating a sustainable, profitable and enjoyable future in farming for its customers. Lely is the only company worldwide to supply the agricultural sector with a complete portfolio of products and services ranging from forage harvesting to automated feeding systems, barn cleaners and milking robots. Lely is also working on business concepts to ensure energy-neutral operations in the dairy sector. The Lely Group is active in more than sixty countries and employs some 2,000 people. Visit http://www.lely.com for more information.

About InfraVision
InfraVision has more than 15 years’ experience with setting up and professionalizing service-oriented IT, Shared Service and Managed Outsourced organizations by implementing proven practices and methods, supported by software products from leading vendors in the IT Service Management and Knowledge Management industry. InfraVision has a presence in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Great Britain and delivers services across EMEA. For more information, visit http://www.infravision.com.

About RightAnswers
RightAnswers is the #1 provider of cloud-based knowledge management, web and mobile self-service and social knowledge solutions for optimizing customer service and IT support. Our 500+ clients around the globe use RightAnswers seamlessly integrated with their CRM, ITSM or other customer service software, to provide stellar support experiences while saving millions of dollars a year. For more information, visit http://www.rightanswers.com.

What’s Going on Behind Barn Doors? They’re Going Digital And Social of Course!

The barn is quiet and dark.  There are the soft sounds of animals moving.  In the shadows you home in on the blue glow of a laptop, your ears pickup the “Old McDonald” ring of a caller ID and then the lights come on automatically from the app on your smart phone. Digital has arrived in the dairy barn and you and your team are taking every advantage it has to offer.

Personally, I look at digital and social media as a year round World Dairy Expo for the dairy industry: something new to learn; something to fill a need; something to share; something for buying; something for selling.  It isn’t necessary to rush out and get everything all at once.  Simply identify the application that speaks to your current dairy goals.  Then buy one or more as it works for your needs. There is something for everyone, and app for everything.

The Digital Dairy Bucket List

It is reported that as high as 95% of dairy farmers already have Smart Phones. Growing numbers of IPhones, iPads and Android mobile phones are conveniently waiting in coveralls, tractor cabs and milking parlors. They are the next generation of technology.  They are much simpler to invest in and learn to use but, like robotic milkers, they have filled the bucket list wish of an industry where labor savings and more data are needed to keep dairying viable and sustainable. Where once using GPS for crop management was groundbreaking, today’s leading edge dairy managers are ready to apply technology to the whole operation.  If you can name a problem you would like solved, there’s is probably a techie close by (or half the world away) who is ready to create an APP so that you can solve it. Furthermore, you don’t have to wait to get back to your computer or farm office.

Remember the days when even simple logistics of handling farm schedules meant waiting.  Being “out of touch” with drivers, deliveries or information.  Never being quite sure when, who or what was going to arrive, you had to stay in sight of the lane or the barn for fear of missing a loosely scheduled event. Today, delaying your schedule because of lack of information isn’t normal and, in most cases, puts a negative mark beside the name of the service provider who hasn’t respected your time enough to keep you in the loop. Social media and the internet means both of you know when and why you’re getting together and what is needed to make the meeting productive.  No wasted time getting up to speed.  Social media and other digital platforms is all about speed and effectiveness.

Whether it’s the weather, low milk prices or yet another outbreak of mastitis, social media and the internet provides an outlet, if not for solutions, at least for support. Shared problems seem easier when you realise that you’re not the only one.

Before, During and After Face-to-Face

Regardless of where you are at with the uptake of social media, it is quite probable that your suppliers, vets and consultants are continuously upgrading their abilities in using this new tool.  Not only does it connect customer and supplier but it connects the knowledge base worldwide.  If you’ve got a question, a “connected” consultant becomes your personal expert in solving problems, creating formula, or determining anything from budgets, to rations, to customized designs for pens, feeders or housing facilities. Entire supply chains move to a new level of speed, accuracy and productivity in the digital mode.

Remember when you were happy to have two or three people to seek out for advice?   How about 200?  Or 2000 to work on a problem? The actual potential goes way beyond that.  A continuously connected dairy community is like having a personal genie in a lamp…. ooops…. genie in a handheld device!!

Calling All Cows

I’ve got a neighbour who has had video cameras installed.  He uses his phone to check calving pens and the barnyard.  Sometimes Facebook, more often on Twitter people ask for and share solutions to problems they are dealing with.  The great thing is that it all happens in real time.  Describe the problem and it is quite likely you will have several suggestions of how to deal with it. This speed goes beyond the simple, “Time is money” that we have always had to deal with.  It provides a real source of confidence that someone has always got the answer.  Whether it’s Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Plus, Pinterest, Tumblir or Instagram — we now have a tool that makes it possible to access buyers, nutritionists and vets or any other number of experts – and provide them with picture, text, figures and background—instantly! At the very least, the dialogue is started.   (Read more: The Shocking Speed of Social Media and the Dairy Industry, How Social Media Is Changing the Holstein World and The Anti-Social Farmer: On the Verge of Extinction?)

Show and Sell

Of course, the closer we get to dollars and cents of dairying, the more the benefits of digital provide payback!  Good business has always depended on word of mouth and now that feature too is vastly speeded up and the reach multiplied. No longer are smaller operations at a disadvantage when competing beside large ones. The playing field is much more level. Marketing from your own interconnected website, Facebook page and Twitter account can drive interest in your embryos, calves or cows far faster than previous hard copy, or traditional advertising methods alone were able to. (Read more:7 Reasons Why Your Dairy Farm Needs To Be On Facebook, Nothing Sells Like Video and Times have changed. Why hasn’t the way you market your dairy cattle?)  Cost effective and fast. Digital is a dairy marketer’s dream.  The ability for buyers and sellers to interact, showcase their news, products and daily stories builds a marketplace of trust, which is the foundation for dairy business … and best of all …repeat dairy business.

Day to Day Decisions.

Digital is the 24-7 partner at your side.  It starts with monitoring and data collection and enhances everything from early disease detection, to better care coordination and other services that keep our herds healthy and productive.  When everyone whose daily job in any way touches the cattle has real time continuous connections, new situations are updated and problems tackled by every person and resource that is available.  For example, spring has finally arrived. The fields are exceptionally wet and there haven’t yet been two days in a row where the weather didn’t provide a challenge of some kind, from chill winds, heavy rains and even a moment or two of nearly-snow-again.  Equipment repairs and annual bookkeeping want attention too.  Multi-tasking is the name of the game but, once again, identify the dairy problem and someone will provide input.  “I saw one of those for sale.” or “We have had good luck with these to keep the calves warm!” and even. “Don’t have an answer for you but, ‘Good Luck’.

The Sunny Side of Dairy Life

It’s wonderful – even fantastic – that the digital future is expanding problem solving capabilities.  It is also tremendous at bringing communities together. A little surfing around the Internet and it doesn’t take long to find wonderful blogs and socially active producers such as DairyCarrie, AgChat and Michele Payn-Knoper and Tom Hoogendoorn– to name but a few (Read more: Dairy Carrie – Diary of a City Kid Gone Country, Michele Payn-Knoper – Standing Up and Speaking Out for Agriculture!! and TOM HOOGENDOORN- Family man, Farmer & Our Face to the Consumer!). Here are opportunities to connect with like mind dairy folks but they also have the added benefit of connecting non-farm communities in a positive way.  One of the most unique connections that I “stumbled upon” was Teats and Tweets which is described as “a unique social media project that looks at the way humans interact with animals and has the cows posting their daily activities on Twitter.” How far out is that?  There is always something to tweak your interest and help you to push the envelope in this industry we are all passionate about.

From Penside to Worldwide

As we gain new ways to use digital for continuous connections and interactions, we will take great leaps forward in solving the issues of modern day dairy farming.  The best results will be continuously adapted and improved … others will be modified or fall by the wayside.  Digital means you can have a voice.  From politicians, to researchers, to someone on the other side of the globe, it is possible to communicate and campaign on key issues – while standing at the side of a calf pen or in the milkhouse.   Perspectives can be shared.  Misinformation corrected.  It is the level playing field that has never been accessed so easily until now.  (Read more: DAIRY PRIDE: Presumed MISSing! “Farmed and Dangerous” – The Dairy Farmer’s Never Ending Battle with Public Perception and What PETA Does NOT KNOW about Raising Dairy Cattle!

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Trends in technology have found their way into every aspect of dairy farming.  Not only are they bridging gaps in communication but also they connect generations of farmers, consumers and dairy industry shareholders.  The future is in our hands.

 

 

 

To learn how to get your farm on Facebook download this free guide.

 

 

Robot milker demand to surge, say farm lenders

Lenders are expecting a rise in demand for robotic milking systems, but urge farmers to look on them as part of a long-term business plan and future herd expansion rather than just replacing a parlour.

Dawn Ferris, senior agricultural manager with financiers Lombard, said the company was looking “very positively” at the dairy sector and its financial needs for future development and growth.

She believed the switch to robotic milking would play a major part in expansion plans for an increasing number of dairy farmers.

“For a dairy farmer to get the best out of any financial investment in a robotic milking system, it’s essential to look at the entire farm’s infrastructure and how it can be incorporated to achieve the most benefit, she said.

While some dairy farmers have installed robots into an existing buildings infrastructure, the way cows use robots – either free access or guided flow – means this method of milking has broader implications for cow housing and feeding systems, warned Ivor Davey of Wilson Agriculture.

“Robotic milking is about far more than just buying a robot, but even if a dairy farmer can’t immediately afford to undertake the changes to the infrastructure, we’d prefer to be involved at the initial stage so we can produce some forecasts and business projections to work towards.”
Dawn Ferris, senior agricultural manager, Lombard

Unlike conventional parlour milking, robots are being used by cows across a 24-hour period and so become an integral part of their routines and behavioural patterns.

To enable and encourage cows to develop their own effective “lifestyle” of eating, resting and being milked the installation of robot milkers often warrants a re-think of the existing housing lay-out.

Robots now account for half of all milking installations in the UK and the change in the tax rules in the last Budget may result in this increasing further.

“We are lending money to dairy farmers and now the government has increased its annual investment allowance from £250,000 to £500,000, it will hopefully encourage more dairy businesses to invest in expansion,” added Ms Ferris.

“Dairy farmers wanting to invest should have a real foresight for their business and be looking ahead in a proactive way and planning for their family’s future.

Questions to consider before investing

  • Big investment – How many do I need? – One robot milks 60 cows
  • A different “management mindset” is required when cows are not being seen in the parlour and milked manually
  • Cows need to be able to see the robots from any point in their building – can I achieve that?
  • Can I milk with a robots and still graze my cows?

“Robotic milking is about far more than just buying a robot, but even if a dairy farmer can’t immediately afford to undertake the changes to the infrastructure, we’d prefer to be involved at the initial stage so we can produce some forecasts and business projections to work towards.”

A straw poll of farmers at a conference organised by dairy consultancy Healthy Cows in Harrogate, North Yorkshire, revealed many were milking fewer than 150 cows, with at least one farmer having already started discussions to finance his first robot.

Mr Davey said that while robots were a big investment they “stacked up” on cost based on their ability to lift yields by at least 15%.

“Based on £100,000 for one robot installed in an 8,000-litre herd, we’re looking at the potential to produce an extra 1,200 litres a cow worth say £360 a cow a year. That’s £26,00 for 60 cows and means a pay-back over four years. And when some robots are giving a 20% increase in yield after the second year it makes these figures look very achievable,” says Mr Davey.

Source: Farmers Weekly

Why are Breeders Not Genomically Testing their Heifers?

In 2013 North American Holstein breeders sampled and received genomic evaluations for less than 7% of all heifers. Given the large number of articles being written about dairy cattle genomics these days, this small percentage left The Bullvine asking why there has not been more uptake on genomic testing?

Uneven Uptake.

Holstein Canada’s 2013 Annual Report shows Newfoundland with 100%, British Columbia with 21.4% and Quebec with 8.6% of the purebred female registrations that were genomically tested. Other provinces are as low as 3%. I expect that the same 3-9% range in uptake of this service exists in the United States but that statistic is not available on the Holstein USA Inc website.  But based on North American averages published by Canadian Dairy Network, the national percentages would be about the same.

Some breeders label genomics as just another inaccurate index. They even call it a production index. Believe those things if you wish, but genomic indexes are 55-70% accurate and genomic ratings exist for all traits – yields, component percents, each conformation area and all management traits. The breeders genomically testing their females are definitely ahead of the curve.

On the male side of the equation, 100% of the young Holstein bulls entering into A.I. in North America are being genomically evaluated. A.I. companies are making extensive use of the genomic results in their young sire proving and marketing programs. In the past five years young sire usage by Holstein breeders has risen from less than 20% to over 50%. This rising amount of semen sold is due primarily to the higher genetic merit for the genomic bulls compared to the proven sires. For the most recent two weeks, 66% of the top 25 bulls on the “Holstein USA’s High Registry Activity by Bull Report” were genomically evaluated unproven bulls.

So what is responsible for this disconnect between what is happening on the young male and young female sides of the pedigree?

Heifers Don’t Matter

Breeders always have reasons for why they do or do not use a service. So let’s talk about what is happening in the breeder’s world.

On the upside, milk prices are high, the USA is exporting 15% of the milk produced, high feed costs have eased somewhat and semen prices are reasonable. However on the downside are areas such as prices for newly calved first lactation females do not cover their rearing costs, sexed semen is not routinely available for young sires and the average herd size in the USA has reached 187 milking cows and many small herd breeders are about to retire or exit the industry.

The real kickers in this scenario are that the market price for high pedigreed animals has fallen off (Read more: An Insider’s Guide to What Sells at the Big Dairy Cattle Auctions 2013 and Is There Still Going To Be A Market For Purebred Dairy Cattle In 10 Years?) and with sexed semen and IVF (Read more: Sexed Semen from Cool Technology to Smart Business Decision, SEXED SEMEN – At Your Service!, SEXING TECHNOLOGIES: Gender Vendors in a Changing Marketplace and IVF: Boom or Bust for the Dairy Industry) there is, what seems to be, an over abundance of heifers. That includes numerous full sisters from the very top dams. This spring we have seen 2300-2400 gTPI or 3.00 PTAT deep pedigreed heifers sell for less than the IVF costs it took to produce them. Is that overabundance or shrewd buying?

The industry has changed and is not likely to return to the times when a small family farm could make a good living from milking 50-75 cows and selling breeding stock as the gravy on the meat and potatoes. Full heifer pens, losing money on raising heifers and no extra reward on sale day for high, but not the very top, heifers does not have breeders feeling positive about the heifer side of the herd. It has resulted in breeders deciding not to incur the cost of genomic testing, if the results are not going to provide information that will help and have a positive impact on the bottom line. Perhaps breeders are not assigning dollar values to genomic benefits or are not breeding for what the market is now demanding.

Current Benefits of Genomic Information

A synopsis of what genomic information has brought to the dairy cattle breeding industry include:

  1. With every young sire being genomically tested, the ones that in the past would have received low proofs no longer need to be sampled. That saves A.I. companies money and saves breeders the holes in pedigrees and animals that must be culled.
  2. Bull dam indexes are now much more accurate and only the top cows have sons being A.I. sampled. This has increased selection intensity but it has resulted in less income for breeders and the significant IVF fees for the, often many, full brothers that did not make the grade.
  3. The parentage of every genomically tested animal can be verified. Increased accuracy.
  4. Where a heifer’s parent average index was formerly 35% reliable, the genomic index is now 65% reliable. Almost double the accuracy.
  5. Brood cows now have indexes that are over 90% reliable where they were formerly in the 60% range. Significantly increased accuracy.
  6. More accurate breeding decisions can now be made for both cows and heifers. More rapid herd and breed improvement.
  7. Herds genomically testing all their heifers can sell off their low end heifers. Decreased rearing costs.
  8. The rates of breed improvement have doubled (Read more: The Genetic “SUPER COW” – Myth vs Reality) due to increased accuracy and much shorter generation intervals. Increased profit for herds and the industry.

For $45 breeders can get a 9K panel run. An interesting comparison is that this is equal to the costs to classify and milk record a cow for a year. In fact from an accuracy perspective genomic testing is a bargain as it costs the same but gives 65% accuracy whereas having a classification and a milk record gives 52% accuracy. In addition the genomic test can be run shortly after birth, saving on raising costs and presenting marketing opportunities.

But what’s the future?

The science of genomic evaluations in dairy cattle is advancing quickly. Breeders can expect in five years to see the following:

  1. The accuracy of Holstein genomic indexes will be over 80% for traits of moderate heritability.
  2. Current research for feed efficiency will produce a genetic rating for that important trait.
  3. Genomic indexes will be available for more traits and with more accuracy for health and fertility traits.
  4. More use will be made of genomic indexes for breeds beyond Holsteins.
  5. Breeders will implant low end cows with high merit embryos and will not need to raise low end heifers.
  6. Cows will stay in the herd longer resulting in higher daily herd average milk yields.
  7. Breeders will be able to focus genetic selection on herd life, feed efficiency, fertility and health traits.
  8. Genomic information will be used to breed for feeding (Read more: Forget Genomics – Epigenomics & Nutrigenomics are the Future) and management (Read more: Herd Health, Management, Genetics and Pilot Projects: A Closer Look at ZOETIS) purposes.
  9. Breeding companies will focus on providing semen and embryos that meet their customers’ needs.
  10. A.I. sires will only need to be housed in stud until there are 25,000 to 100,000 doses collected. (Read more: The End of the Daughter Proven Sire Era)

In five years time, discerning breeders will use genomic information like any other tool to breed better cattle and generate on-farm profit. If the cost of testing could be lowered from $45 to about $30 for a 9K panel evaluation, then the uptake would definitely increase significantly.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

We must always look to the future. For some breeders that may be one year until they sell out. However for many, including many young people just entering the industry, that future could be 10 to 30 years from now. Their decision should not be how they can do the heifer side as cheaply as possible. It needs to be how they can have the most profitable cows. The time is now to start genomically testing all heifers. Eliminating the lower end. Correctively mate to make the top end even better. Knowing all the facts and having all the information about the heifer herd is not a luxury, it is a necessity. Do not let opportunity pass you by. 


The Dairy Breeders No BS Guide to Genomics

 

Not sure what all this hype about genomics is all about?

Want to learn what it is and what it means to your breeding program?

Download this free guide.

 

 

 

 

The Future of Dairy Cattle Breeding Is In the Data

Over the past few years the management and genetic sides of the dairy cattle industry have been handed a huge data opportunity.  One example comes from Lely who report that their robotic system can capture more than 120 different values per cow per day. Sounds excessive doesn’t it? For some breeders that number is beyond comprehension. However, before offering a final assessment on volume of data, let’s dig deeper. Lely Current Data Collection

Dairy farm operators know very well the challenges resulting from high feed cost and narrow margins. But they do not have the numbers to get down to the exact profit at each individual cow level. Do they breed Bessie back? If so what should she be breed to improve her? Or is she the next cow to be culled based on revenue generated less expenses? The challenge has been that managing Bessie has always been in hindsight and what is needed is real time management of her situation. Add to that the fact that wages and labor laws in many developed countries are causing breeders to rethink the degree of automation to apply to their operations. Many sensors already exist for measuring and monitoring cows and many are in the process of coming to market. It all comes down to having the numbers to manage, breed, feed and farm. There are many management   considerations that discerning breeders should reflect on as they plan for future success in the dairy cattle industry.

Eight Numbers for Better Cow Management Decisions

  • Animal Weight – Ways of capturing a cow’s weight available many more factors can be added to what is known on an individual cow basis. Factors like feed intake, loosing or gaining weight and individual cow profit per day for the past week come quickly to mind.  These sensors also allow for monitoring of negative energy balance determined by body weight changes and milk solid ratios.
  • Rumination – Having a healthy rumen is paramount to having a productive profitable dairy cow. Since it is not possible to determine DMI (Dry Matter Intake) on an individual cow basis, rumen activity sensors are used to endure that a cow’s digestive system is functioning well. The sensors also allow for consistent monitoring of feed delivery to ensure feed truck operators are doing their job.
  • Components / Milk QualityMany on-farm systems can now capture fat %, protein %, lactose %, milking time, SCC, Conductivity and color of the milk at every milking (SCC is not equal to conductivity and color of the milk indicates mastitis alerts as well). These numbers and some of the relationships one to another give important information on both a daily and lactation basis. Knowing about problems immediately is by far the best way to address them. Wouldn’t all breeders like to be able to know about a pending SCC spike and address it immediately?
  • Temperature – is captured as either milk temperature or can be electronically read from a device such as a bolus in the rumen. The milk temperature is taken 2 – 4 times per day and is a start. However having an internal device provides for real time cow management. The obvious use of temperature changes is general cow health throughout lactation in order to detect differences from normal. Knowing a cow’s temperature after calving has been found to be very useful    in getting her off to the right start. New to management tools could be monitoring a cow’s temperature, hour by hour, during her heat period. Breeding at exactly the right time is being studied and preliminary results are showing greatly increased pregnancy rates when body temperature is considered. Think how beneficial it would be to have a 65% conception rate instead of a 35-40% rate.
  • Heat Detection – In addition to the idea, just mentioned, of breeding by temperature during heat, there are many systems working successfully that record cow movement and thus signal to breeders that a cow is more active and should be closely observed for being in heat. Yet another device is one that measures hormone levels signalling an on-coming heat (Read more: Better Decision Making by Using Technology). Just think of the savings in labor, drugs, vet costs, semen, extra days spent in dry pens and days of lower milk production at the end of lactation if conception rates could be 70% or higher in cows and 85% or higher in heifers.
  • Milk Yield Every Milking – On a milking to milking basis nothing is more important than to know if a cow has produced to the expected level. All automated milking systems can do that and so breeders with those systems have a very important tool at their disposal. Cows falling below expectation are highlighted for attention by the herdsman either immediately or on a list that can be reviewed at any time.
  • Listings – Every automated system is capable of generating lists and graphs from the data captured. When a breeder first gets an automated system, they use the lists to find the problems or underperforming cows. However after a time breeders also find the reports to be very beneficial for setting goals for their cows and herd. A list can be as simple as knowing which cows, in a robotic herd, have not been milked. Or are they sick or lame? No matter what, the herdsman has a reason to find the cow and investigate. Breeders not only benefit from knowing what goes on in their own herd but the equipment providers are able to use the data from across herds in establishing benchmarks. And it is not only the breeder that benefits, his veterinarian and feed advisor now have information that they can use to make better recommendations.
  • Heifers The heifer herd is the forgotten part of the dairy herd (Read more: Should you be raising your own heifers?). Automated calf feeding systems are now being used successfully. Many of the devices mentioned above, for cows, can be used for heifers as well. Just think of what the saving would be if age at first calving could be reduced by 3-4 months, $400 saved per heifer raised amounts to $20,000 savings per year in a 100 cow herd.

Numbers to Breed Better Cows

Having better management tools is only 50% of the success equation. The other half is breeding better cows. The data that would separate the best from the rest is a long and growing list.

  •  Milk Yield Every Milking – The most accurate lactation production is when a weight from every milking is known. By having a weight captured at every milking, a genetic index could be calculated for a bull’s daughters peak production and persistency of production. Knowing such details may in fact help breeders determine the performance pattern that they want from their cows.
  • Components / Milk Quality – Here as well, having more observations will increase the accuracy of genetic indexes in order to breed cows that produce the milk that processors and consumers demand.
  • Milking Speed – The current genetic indexes are calculated using breeder assigned subjective rating. Fast, average or slow. Automated milking systems are now capable of capturing milking times. As more herds move to automated systems it will be possible to know if a bull’s daughters take 30 seconds less or 30 second more to milk. Time to milk determines the number of cows per robot or the size of the parlor. Milking speed is not consistent throughout the life of a cow and has variations even in the lactation. More over the robot gives an honest measurement which is not affected by the fear of the cow for the milking appraiser.
  • Adaptability / Temperament – Breeder know that not all cows are equal when it comes to be handled, milked and cared for. Using data from automated systems it will, in the future, be possible to produce genetic ratings for how bull’s daughters work within automated systems, their temperament, and other factors that breeders see as being necessary.
  • Reproduction / Fertility – Currently the data we have on cows, bulls and embryos are stored on many different databases. Bringing that information to a linked data system, studying it and then developing genetic bull rankings could well be a significant development when it comes to increasing the reproductive performance of dairy cattle.
  • Feed Efficiency – One of the most read articles that The Bullvine routinely produces is the one listing sires that will produce the most feed efficient cows (Read more: Feed Efficiency: The Money Saver and 50 Sires that will Produce Feed Efficient Cows ).  Bullvine readers want to have genetic evaluations for feed efficiency. For some Bullvine readers sire rankings cannot come too quickly. Research is currently underway to determine the relationship between feed efficiency and other genetic indexes. However if feed intake data could come from automated on-farm systems it would be a big step forward.
  • Lameness / Mobility – On a herd and industry basis, mobility issues are a big financial drain due to animal cull, lost production and added costs. Breeders know that cows that avoid lameness, that are able to easily get to the feed bunk or pasture and that spend the majority of their time resting, are the kind of cows that make the most profit. With more complete data from automated systems and with perhaps additional sensors it will someday be possible to have genetic indexes for mobility.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The definitive statement, when it comes to information and data on dairy farms, is that we have currently only scratched the surface. Definitely much more data from automated on-farm systems will soon be available for breeders to use to operate their dairy enterprises and to select their sires. Decisions made by dealing with the exceptions or past performance are old concepts. What is needed is more condensed and focused information and data to manage with on a real time basis. More data from automated data capture systems can and will make this a better industry. Let’s welcome in the future.

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

Maximizing the cloud for your farm business

The concept of cloud computing isn’t new to business, but it’s moving into agriculture in a big way. And for 2014, farmers will find they have a number of convenient and valuable ways to work with the data they create on their operations. In this issue, we start a conversation about data and data management that will continue in different ways throughout the year.

Taking advantage of cloud computing will require understanding the relation-ships involved, and the features and benefits offered by the different services.

Farmers are moving toward these services because information collected from field tasks is more valuable when it can be easily shared with trusted providers who can offer insight, prescription maps and more. The key is understanding the benefits of the services you choose to work with and the return for your operation.

Data value

“This data is valuable to companies,” says Adam Gittins, general manager, HTS Ag. “You want to know what kind of relationship you’re entering with these services.”

He cautions growers to read privacy statements and terms of use for any service, so you at least know what’s going on. Many companies offering services are aggregating data, without personal information, to enhance decision-making for the future. It means using the raw data you collect to create models and analyses, but your original data is still intact on the service and waiting for you to use.

The aggregated, or anonymized, data has value to not only the company, but also farmer-customers using the service. “There’s a lot of value, and farmers shouldn’t just give it away,” he says.

Gittins’ company works closely with Ag Leader, whose new AgFiniti services allow you to store information in a data cloud and share as needed. Ag Leader has said it will not touch a farmer’s data, and that’s part of its privacy policy.

Luke James, Ag Leader software manager, notes that the company “respects and values the growers being independent and allowing them to do whatever they want with their information. We encourage growers to read the terms of service and what the data will be used for when they sign up.”

In essence, some services act as data stores that allow you to move information from field to cloud for easier access for yourself or others. Raven Slingshot has been offering this kind of service for four years, and Paul Welbig, general manager of the company’s Austin Technology Center, says they have not gotten into the business of aggregating information. However, users of Slingshot can pass their information on to others that do. “We think there’s tremendous value to [aggregating information] for the future, but we have to log more data and more relevant data; then start doing some intelligence around that.” In essence, the industry is in its infancy, and the true value of that information is yet to be determined.

The value proposition in sharing data may in fact be easy access to more useful information for your farm simply by taking part in the services.

Trimble’s Connected Farm approach to data management was a leader in cloud data use as well, and last fall creation of the new dashboard for displaying that information helped farmers see more benefits of cloud access to information. “Light bulbs went on with growers,” says Mike Martinez, Trimble marketing director.

“The system shows what work activity has been completed in the field. And when the job is completed, it is transmitted to the Connected Farm system. Farmers can also do the logistics of deciding what equipment should be deployed across the farm to finish faster, too.”

Martinez notes that Trimble is also not aggregating information on its own, but knows that farmers pass along data files to other services (using the industry-standard “shape” file) where that work can be done. “We’re providing those trusted advisers the tools they need to provide better service to their clients.”

Aggregating, or anonymizing, data

Just what is aggregated data? Take seed company information. You plant a specific hybrid on your field in a specific location, and record the yield. If you work with a seed company that aggregates data, and you opt in, your hybrid, location and yield data would be pulled together with others’ information to create a bigger map of that hybrid’s performance.

You don’t need a cloud data service to do that. In fact, whenever you share data, with or without the cloud, it can be collected and used by third parties (depending on their privacy policies). And the idea isn’t uncommon. Farm business management associations have been taking financial data and creating benchmarking tools for years that help farmers manage their businesses.

“We have a long history of working with farm data,” says Joe Foresman, director of services, DuPont Pioneer. “We’ve been building farm yield maps for more than 10 years with information from 12 million acres at harvest and another 8 million at planting.”

The company’s Field360 program is one where farmers can submit their data to DuPont Pioneer to have custom yield maps created. In some cases, farmers work with Pioneer to run “treatment analysis” on crop inputs to determine input performance on their farm. Field360, the company’s cloud-based service, also allows farmers to move, store and share data more easily.

Gather enough aggregated information matched to general soil type, weather and yield information, and a company has better performance information for that specific hybrid in a number of situations.

During a recent talk, Michael Boehlje, Purdue University ag economist, commented: “Data without aggregation is just data.” He notes that a single farm’s annual data is just one set and not enough information to make any conclusions.

“A farmer who has only his own information only has one observation per year, and may not have the controls to separate out the [range of] variables that explain that yield,” Boehlje noted. “One of the ways to make that data more useful is to have multiple sets of observations to separate the [variables] that explain yield differences.”

The key is seeing the big picture and having better decision-making information for choosing hybrids in the future. Of course, that information is valuable to companies as well, since aggregated performance data is like a giant yield trial that can be more accurate than small plot work.

Many players see that opportunity to provide your farm with better information. Over at Monsanto, FieldScripts, which was piloted in 2013, is moving forward in 2014. “We can analyze farm data to build better ‘scripts’ today and for farmers in the future,” says Dave Rylander, FieldScripts launch lead, Monsanto.

Rylander says there’s a lot of talk about this data aggregation and data privacy. He wants farmers to have a clear understanding of the benefits offered. “They ask, ‘Will you aggregate or use my data to help build other FieldScripts?’ And I would say, ‘Yes, and we learn from this data,’ ” he notes. “We’ve learned from all the experiences on FieldScripts and learned what to look at in their data to build a better prescription for the future.”

In fact, Rylander says that for 2014 farmers that participate and want to take part may be asked to share more information. The idea is that over time this aggregated information will help Monsanto make better prescriptions. Those are goals for other providers that aggregate as well.

From the machine

Another example is machine data. Aggregating performance data across a field inventory of working machines has a tremendous benefit for companies and can help improve future designs. Farmers who use JDLink, for example, would be able to access information about their own machines, but John Deere also has access to the aggregated information — if the farmer opts in.

Chis Batdorf, product marketing manager, John Deere Intelligent Solutions Group, notes that the company has created a website — johndeere.com/trust — that defines the data and privacy agreements in key detail. “The core principles around data at John Deere are that there is value in the data for the customer and the company. We’re very transparent about what we will and will not do with the data. And the customer will have choices, and the customer controls the direction of the data.”

No matter how much a company tests a machine or works to gather information, it would be difficult to get the universe of data available from these new telemetry tools on the market from major players. How does a specific model work in high temperatures under load? Would the machine perform the same at a lower rpm, saving fuel and adding to engine life?

These same services would also allow your local dealer to know how your machine is performing at any given time.

Over at AGCO, the Fuse strategy can capture machine information, but only if the farmer opts in, says Jason O’Flanagan, senior marketing specialist, North America. “Right now we offer limited data transfer capabilities, but machine data collection is widely available. This is an opt-in service for us to look at the data. The data belongs to the customer, even if it’s on our server,” he says.

AGCO’s main focus is that machine data. “The data we would like to see is engine temperature, spikes in oil pressure, and [to] monitor machines to improve design,” he says. “We’re not really in the yield and harvest data capture service.”

To opt in, or not

Having access to your data from the machine as it comes out of the field is more than handy; it’s also more likely that you’ll put that information to use. Waiting until winter to move yield maps from combine to the office computer takes time. Having that information available right away as the combine leaves the field offers advantages.

An example commonly used is the ability to harvest a field and have combine yield data transmitted immediately to the cloud, where a farmer can pass it on to an agronomist for a fall-fertilizer prescription — without pulling a data card or thumb drive from the monitor and taking it to the office. The agronomist can efficiently send that prescription back to the cloud, where the applicator can pull it down and roll in for fall fertilizer very soon after the combine leaves. In this farming game of inches, time-critical tasks like fall and spring work would be enhanced with these kinds of data services.

The key is understanding the features and benefits offered. “These services will be a reality for a lot of people,” says HTS Ag’s Adam Gittins, who has a long history in the information technologies business. “The benefits [of the services offered] are worth the trade-offs. It’s an individual decision. The key is being informed and realize what’s going on.”

He notes that policies change over time. “In the information technologies space, we’ve seen where free is no longer free. Guess what? They still have your data; you have to be aware of what’s going on. Rules change for the future, and you may have to pay to get to your data.”

He’s talking beyond basic subscription fees for the service. The key to remember is that you essentially have all your data. It’s in the combine or tractor, and that should be stored somewhere for safe-keeping, too.

The recent breach at Target and Neiman Marcus opened a lot of people’s eyes to data privacy worries. Farmers who have long collected information on yield and prescription product use worry about what they have and its value to others. But Steve Sonka, emeritus professor of agricultural strategy, University of Illinois, has a different take on that idea: “We worry about breaches, and I might lose sleep over credit card numbers. You have to figure out where you might be damaged. But if somebody has my yield map, what are they going to do with it and how are they going to harm me? If they’re sophisticated enough to steal a yield map, they’ll do something else that will make them more money.”

Putting farm information to better use has merit. Sonka thinks that the simple tasks like faster prescription maps would be the first step, but he sees it going beyond that: “Immediacy will drive other things, but I would suggest those will turn out to have less value. The ability to look across many operations, and gain insights and translate that information for use in our own operations will have the greater long-run value.”


Herd Health, Management, Genetics and Pilot Projects: A Closer Look at ZOETIS

Zoetis is a global animal health company with 60 years of experience.  Zoetis, formerly Pfizer Animal Health, was a business unit within Pfizer Inc.  On February 1, 2013, Zoetis became a stand-alone animal health company.  Zoetis is a publicly traded company on the NYSE.

When DNA profiling in herds, the program at Zoetis is to get dairy producers to focus on genotyping the entire heifer group.  This allows breeders to make selection and management decisions, before investing the full cost of raising each heifer.  Depending on where breeders are located, the cost of raising a heifer ranges from $2000 to $3500 (Read more: Should you be raising your own heifers?) By testing animals at a young age, breeders can decide if they want to sell the heifer, breed her to a beef sire, use her as an embryo recipient or consider flushing her.  It’s about making accurate choices and, ultimately, profit.

Which Benefit Category Works for YOU?

  • Do you have an excess of heifers?
    DNA profiling means you can manage your heifer inventory more precisely and invest your rearing budget in the heifers that you need to keep.  Keeping control of the heifer inventory also has an indirect health benefit. Reduced numbers prevents heifer facilities from being overcrowded. A less stressful environment reduces calfhood and heifer diseases. Remember that heifer rearing is the third largest on-farm cost after labor and feed.
  • Do you use sexed semen?
    This higher priced tool can be best applied to the top 50% of heifers based on their genetic merit. Doing so is a significant step toward elevating the genetic potential of the next generation of heifers in your herd.
  • Is your herd unregistered? 
    You have the most to benefit from genomic testing because you will be going from zero genetic information to more genetic information than you could ever get from simply registering your animals. Now you can make better selection and mating decisions.
  • Is profitability your first priority?
    The top priority profitability traits for most herds are selection for milk components, with the remaining emphasis on traits that contribute to longer herd life (SCS, DF, HL, F/L and mammary).  LPI is a great index to use as a first sort in selecting the most profitable animals.

Analysis.  Assessment.  Action.

Zoetis has developed the “CLARIFIDE” program. Veterinarians are trained in understanding the basics of genomics and how this information can be integrated as part of the herd’s management program.  There are over 100 veterinarians across Canada that have been given the designation of “CLARIFIDE Accredited Veterinarian”.  Many of them underwent a multi-day training program taught by representatives from Zoetis, CDN, Holstein Canada and Semex. Today, if a local vet has not been trained through the CLARIFIDE program, but they have a client that is interested in submitting through CLARIFIDE, Zoetis will conduct training with these vets either in person or on-line.” Dr. Melodie Chan, Zoetis Business Lead and Manager Veterinary Services, concludes. “With access to this information, breeders are able to allocate their resources more effectively.  As genomic research progresses, we may even be able to consider health protocols to match each animals’ potential to respond – such as response to vaccination.”

Clarifying Genetic Potential

The goal of every dairy breeder is to identify and act upon the genetic potential of their dairy animals. “Through the CLARIFIDE program, Zoetis has worked closely with its Alliance partners.” says Dr. Chan, who outlines the benefits and potential. “By working closely with CDN, Holstein Canada and Semex, the CLARIFIDE genomic consulting program offered through Zoetis provides a truly Canadian perspective. Furthermore, this Alliance has also fostered research initiatives and collaborative funding towards projects that ultimately benefit the Canadian dairy industry. In 2012-2013 Zoetis funded genotyping of approximately 2,000 Canadian proven sires so that their offspring could be included in the genome pool.  The addition of this genetic information will aid in the predictive value of genomic testing, in particular for Canadian only traits, such as temperament and milking speed.”

ZOETIS + SEMEX + HOLSTEIN CANADA + CDN – Combined Strengths. Collaborative Approach.

Effective May 1, 2012, Zoetis (formerly Pfizer Animal Health) joined the existing alliance between the Canadian Dairy Network (CDN), the Holstein Association of Canada (Holstein Canada), and the Semex Alliance (Semex).  Dr. Chan describes the strategy. “The intent of this alliance is to foster a collaborative approach to delivering predictive genetic information to the Canadian dairy industry, to promote female genotyping and to assist Canada’s dairy producers in using genetic information to make sound management decisions and propagate desired traits. “The members of the alliance feel that by engaging in this partnership, breeders ultimately benefit from the combined strengths of each organization.”

Update on Pilot Study Results

Dr. Josh Lindenbach, Warman Saskatchewan, a Clarifide Approved Veterinarian, shared some of the economic analyses that he did with two of the Zoetis pilot-project herds.  In both herds, Dr. Lindenbach sorted the animals based on LPI and compared it to kg of BF shipped.  “In Herd #1, there was a $960 average gross profit advantage between the top 1/3 and bottom 1/3 of the herd based on LPI (48 animals genotyped).  In Herd #2, there was a $1345 average gross profit advantage between animals that had an above average LPI number vs. a below average LPI number.”

THEY’RE TALKING  about CLARIFIDE

Zoetis has received the following comments from breeders and vets involved in the CLARIFIDE program:

  •  “This gives us a better way to manage the heifer inventory by knowing which ones to keep, sell or use as recips, and which ones to use sexed semen on.”
  • “Herd weaknesses were known before but now we find them younger and more accurately“
  • “We are now buying semen from bulls that address herd weaknesses as identified by genomics”
  • “More targeted use of sexed semen”
  • “We have more open discussions of breeding discussions involving both vets and AI reps, sometimes even together!”
  • “By culling my bottom end heifers, the heifers coming into the milking herd are more solid producing animals. We have higher milk production and have been able to raise the overall health level of our herd.”
  • “It’s not the top half of my herd that I ever have to worry about – it’s the bottom half.  I want to be able to know ahead of time who could potentially cause me problems and be able to manage my heifer inventory appropriately, based on this knowledge.”

ZOETIS and TOP BREEDERS

There have been interesting results from three different groups from the Zoetis field trial as Dr. Chan reports. “Breeders that are in the top 10% ,from a farm management standpoint, who are excellent at raising calves and keeping them alive, have reached a plateau with their production and are looking for the “next thing” that they can improve on to help them become more profitable were the first ones to trust in genomic technology and see its value.  Dr. Chan states, “The key is to make sure you have invested fully in your calf raising program to ensure that disease issues are kept to a minimum and calves have doubled their birth weight at 56 days – then you can be assured that these heifers will reach their full genetic potential.” She continues with the benefits for two other groups.”Breeders that are sitting on excess heifers and looking at their expenses were also quick to jump on board.  For a group of Hutterite breeders that are limited to the use of natural service bulls only, genomics provided them with an opportunity to push their genetic progress by culling some of the bottom end animals and replacing them with purchased animals that ranked higher on LPI.”  Using data that CDN supplied, Dr. Chan in 2012 looked at phenotype vs. genotype.  “We took the CDN database as being “one herd” and took the raw data without adjusting for any environmental effects.  Despite that, we were still able to show a significant difference in performance, if we used genomics as a predictor for performance.”

zoetis chart

The Bullvine Bottom Line

This sounds like every breeder’s dream.  It checks off several breeder, service provider and advisor goals. “Now breeders not only know a heifer’s genetic potential early in her life but have the information to find more accurate ways to allocate resources.”  Whenever the tools advance dairy breeders` goals and profitability, that’s a win-win for everybody.

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

Money Loves Agriculture. This Relationship is Brought to You By AgFunder.

483489_373221862768803_451092309_n[1]We know there are people and companies with money to invest.  We know there are people with passion for agricultural business that are seeking funding. Bringing the two groups together is the challenge.

 

AgFunder:  Where the Money Grows

AgFunder CEO Rob Leclerc

AgFunder CEO Rob Leclerc

By bringing investment opportunities to the investment community we’re really helping to create a new asset class for many investors who did not have access to these types of opportunities before.” Explains AgFunder CEO Rob Leclerc.

From Challenges to Opportunity

“AgFunder was born out of challenges I had raising capital for my first startup, Babbleflix, and then for SeedRock Africa Agriculture. At the time we discussed how an online investment platform could more efficiently bring together ag investors with ag opportunities, but we soon discovered that the regulations outlined by the Securities and Exchange Committee prohibited the formation of such marketplaces.” In the spring of 2012 everything changed when congress passed the JOBS Act to make it easier for small and emerging growth companies to access capital.

The Evolution of AgFunder

AgFunder was born out of the new JOBS Act legislation which started to go into effect on September 23rd, 2013. Prior to the JOBS Act issuers (the company) were required to have a substantial pre-existing relationship with the purchaser (the investor); or another way of saying this is that the Securities and Exchange Commission banned the use of general advertising or solicitation to attract investors. The consequence of this was that it limited the creation of marketplaces that could efficiently bring together buyers and seller to once place.

Beyond the Conventional

There are conventional ways to get money and for some undertakings this works. “However, it is not enough for AgFunder to serve as a marketplace.” explains AgFunder CEO Rob Leclerc who looks at finding multiple investors.  “Unlike situations such as Amazon.com where a single customer might buy a single item, in the investment world you typically have a number of investors coming together to invest in a single company and so AgFunder also needs to efficiently syndicate investors.”

Welcome to the Digital Roadshow

Having found potential investors, the next step is preparing the company sourcing money for the process ahead. “For a company listed on AgFunder we will have them go through a digital roadshow.”  He explains the progression. “First the company must begin by soliciting initial interest, then moving to a series of online webinars where investors can have a Q&A with the management team. This is followed by a closing period where investors must decide if they’re in or they’re out. For the closing period, all proceeds are held in escrow. If the company reaches its pre-established capital target, then the investment is executed and the investors become shareholders in the company. However, in the event that the company fails to reach its capital target, all capital is returned to the investor.”

The AgFunder Dream Team: Expertise, Credibility and Commitment

Michael Dean

Michael Dean (COO)

In preparing for the 2014 Olympic Games, many sports enthusiasts debate for hours on how to put together a dream team to stand on the podium for their favorite team sport.  For many businesses it is a goal to cover all the major skills when talents are pooled.  The team that has pulled together for AgFunder is a dream team that is ready to go for the gold at every level led by Rob Leclerc (CEO), Michael Dean (COO) and Justin Bruch (Technical Director).  But even more remarkable for this team is that individually they also have exceptional experience, training and expertise.  Their wide-ranging talent is the supporting wall that investors and companies can rely on. Michael Dean COO and co-founder of AgFunder has led the development of the company from its inception and is responsible for executing the business model and the development of all assets in West Africa. CEO Rob Leclerc is recognized internationally and often speaks at global conferences on agriculture, technology and capital raising. Justin Bruch is Technical Director for AgFunder. Justin is an Iowa native and 5th generation farmer with over 16 years of experience in large-scale farming in excess of 10,000 hectares. Justin has set up and managed farms on four continents, including a $30m farm for Morgan Stanley in the Ukraine. Iowa, Brazil, Africa, and the Ukraine. There are two senior advisors on the team.  Adam Oliver is an equity partner at Brown & Co. and was a former Director at Black Earth Farming.  He helped lead them to the largest farming IPO in history.  John Simon is a former Executive VP at the Private Overseas Investment Corporation and the Former US Ambassador to the African Union. And this is merely the tip of the giant skills list this “dream team” possesses.

AgFunder Finds the Money

When the rubber hits the road, you want to be working with a company that achieves success.  From small startups to mega-business AgFunder targets that success. “AgFunder was in its beta mode until early 2013 and so we’ve been showcasing some smaller opportunities in the agtech space. One of the companies we’re featuring is called TerViva, and they’re building a great platform around an alternative biofuels crop called pongamia which could be a great drop in replacement for citrus orchards which have been devastated by citrus greening disease. TerViva’s been featured in CNN Money and they have a very bright and talented team driving this forward.” The future looks bright for the company and is moving rapidly ahead. “AgFunder is currently processing nearly $1 billion in deal flow opportunities on the platform, with the largest being $100m.”

Dairy AgFunder

Rob highlights some dairy projects that AgFunder is working on. “We’re in advanced discussions with one group that is in the early stages of developing the largest dairy operation on Hawaii. As you may know, most dairy products in Hawaii are imported and the local food movement is really driving demand for local sourcing. We think this could be a perfect project for AgFunder because we think that local investors will really embrace this opportunity to invest something that they consume every day, but which is currently imported.”

agfunder-screen shotAgFunder Builds Positive Connections between Entrepreneurs and Investors

AgFunder is making positive strides in the marketplace report the founders. “We’ve been really overwhelmed by the reception and we’re seeing a real need for this on both sides of the table. On the one side, the inherently local and rural nature of agriculture means that it is typically far removed from the centers of finance, which makes it extra difficult for Ag entrepreneurs to raise capital. On the flip side, we’ve been talking to a lot of institutional and individual investors who are interested in investing in agriculture-related opportunities but don’t know where to start and may need to be educated about the opportunities.”

Building a community of Entrepreneurs and Investors

AgFunder provides an opportunity for entrepreneurs to reach thousands of investors. However, if you think you can just list your company and come back 2 months later you are sorely mistaken. Raising capital is hard work and entrepreneurs need to leverage the marketing component of the platform to drive the message to investors.

Growing Business not Growing Frustrated

Our goal is to bring ag investors and every investable agriculture opportunity to the AgFunder platform and so that we can quickly match investors with opportunities. In doing so, we want to cut the sales process down from 12-18 months to 2 months, thereby letting companies work on their business rather than focusing their energy on resources on raising capital. We think we can become the John Deere for Agrifinance.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

When defining success, we must consistently think of agriculture in all of its aspects and especially in terms of sustainability and profitability.  Bringing the right people together at the right time is what AgFunder is committed to says Rob Leclerc. “We think AgFunder can be a real game changer for wealthy farmers who want to invest in an area that they trust and understand, rather than putting their money into some hot internet stock recommended to them by their broker. In fact, we think farmers could generate great returns and embarrass some of those high paid Wall Street portfolio managers!”

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

Sexed Semen from Cool Technology to Smart Business Decision

Sometimes we are guilty of overthinking things.  We talk about corrective mating, line breeding, and developing a distinct bloodline, when in reality nothing makes more dollars and cents than getting more female calves from your best cows.  No matter what your breeding or profit goals are, there is no question that you need to get  your cows back in calf for another lactation and have them  produce enough replacement heifers.  These are two top metrics every dairy must aim for.

There used to be a time when you could burn through young cows, but today’s modern dairy operation is dependent on getting the milking cows back in calf and preferably they will produce 3-4 heifers throughout the course of their lifetime.  I say heifers because recent analysis of 2,390,000 lactation records covering 1,490,000 cows found a clear pattern: Cows produce more milk for their daughters than their sons.  The sex of the first calf is particularly important and can influence how much milk production is generated in future lactations as well.  (Read more: Study Of 1.5 Million Cows Shows Daughters Get More Milk Than Sons) In fact the study found that cows that gestated back-to-back daughters produced as much as 1,000 pounds more milk than those that give birth to sons over the first two lactations.

The effect of sons and daughters on mum's milk production, across two lactations.

The effect of sons and daughters on mum’s milk production, across two lactations. S = son, D = daughter, numbers along x-axis indicate order of pregnancy. Credit: Hinde et al, 2014, PLOS ONE.

Think about this.  For example, this would make a bull thought of as a type sire, such as Regancrest Braxton, who has a PTAT of 3.70 and a  milk proof  of 1516 lbs. into a +2016 lbs. for Milk, when used on a cow that might have produced 2 daughters as compared to 2 sons.  That would rank Braxton among the top 200 proven sires for production (or the top 1% of the breed) and yet he has more than twice the type improvement values of those production sires.

So you say, “Sure that all sounds good, but how do you make it happen?”  Well the answer is pretty simple. “You use Sexed Semen.”  Now for those of you who have a negative opinion of sexed semen.  It probably comes is because you used sexed semen or recall the rumors in the early days when the conception was low, the reliability was poor and the price of semen was high.  In 2014 the reality is that all of the negative factors have changed significantly.  Over the past 10 years the technology behind sexed semen has changed drastically.  Juan Moreno, CEO of Sexing Technologies, (Read more: SEXING TECHNOLOGIES: Gender Vendors in a Changing Marketplace) shared the following stats at the recent Canadian Dairy Xpo (Watch the video here):

  • 1984 to 2000
    Purity Under 80%
    Low Fertility (below 50%)
    1000 doses of conventional semen would produce 200 doses of sexed semen.
  • 2002 to 2012
    85% Purity
    about 80% fertility rate of that of conventional.
    1000 doses of conventional semen would produce 400 doses of sexed semen.
  • Current
    93% Purity
    98% fertility rate of that of conventional.
    1000 doses of conventional semen can now produce 1100 doses of sexed semen.

From a breeder prospective, sexed semen has gone from a costly alternative to a probable alternative for selective situations, to a smart business decision.

One of the things driving the cost down as well is that the equipment that sorts the semen has gone from processing 200 sperm cells per hour to over 100X times that rate per hour.

The math is pretty simple.  In order to justify the extra cost of the semen, the added production alone would more than cover the cost.  And that does not even factor in the increased revenues from having more female calves.  For many breeders who are using sexed semen, they have also started breeding the bottom 10% to beef sires (Read more: Why you should get rid of the bottom 10%).  With beef cull calves in such demand, due to the shortage of beef cattle, the price for these calves has never been higher.  In fact for many herds these bottom 10% of seed stock calves have become a significant income source.  Especially when bred to be sexed male beef semen.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

There is no question that sexed semen has come a long way over the past 20 years and particularly in the last five.  Like most new technologies, it takes a period of time to perfect the science behind the cool new product, and help bring the cost of production down.  Today the cost of production of sexed semen is not nearly as high as it once.  As well, there is new data showing that cows that calve with two successive females produce up to 1,000 more lbs of milk in those 1st two lactations.  It’s clear that sexed semen is worth the investment.

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

Important Mutation Discovered in Dairy Cattle

 Scientists have found a genomic deletion that affects fertility and milk yield in dairy cattle at the same time. The discovery can help explain a dilemma in dairy cattle breeding: the negative correlation between fertility and milk production.

For the past many years milk yield in Scandinavian dairy cattle has gone in one clear direction: up. This has been due to targeted breeding programs and modern breeding methods. Despite putting large weight in the breeding goal in Nordic countries, almost no improvement is achieved for fertility. It now seems that this unfavorable correlation between milk yield and fertility is partially affected by a deletion of a simple gene sequence. The presence and effects of this mutation have recently been discovered by scientists from Aarhus University, University of Liège, MTT Agrifood Research Finland, in collaboration with the Danish Agricultural Advisory Service and the Nordic Cattle Genetic Evaluation.

Scientists, farmers and advisors have generally assumed that the reduction in fertility is primarily due to the negative energy balance of high-producing cows at the peak of their lactation but now the scientists have also found a genetic explanation.

“We have discovered a deletion encompassing four genes as the causative variant and shown that the deletion is a recessive embryonically lethal mutation,” explains Goutam Sahana. “This means that the calves die while they are still embryos and are aborted or reported as insemination failure. The fact that the mutation is recessive means that both parents must carry it and pass the genes on to their calf for the calf to be affected. The bulls carrying the deletion can be routinely identified in on-going genomic selection program and by avoiding carrier-by-carrier matings a quantum jump in fertility could be achieved in Nordic red breeds,” adds Goutam Sahana.

Can’t have your cake and eat it too

To make matters worse, this particular mutation has become rather common in Nordic Red cattle, however, the deletion is totally absent in Nordic Holstein and Danish Jersey populations. Based on the frequency of the mutation in the population, it is estimated that 2.89, 1.32 and 0.42% of embryos are dying in Finnish Ayshire, Swedish Red and Danish Red cattle respectively due to this mutation.

The reason that the deleted gene sequence causing embryo mortality has become relatively widespread is that it has such as strong positive effect on milk yield. By selecting for high milk yields, breeders have inadvertently also selected for embryo mortality — a situation of so-called hitchhiking.

“Our study demonstrates that embryonic lethal mutations account for a non-negligible fraction of the decline in fertility of domestic cattle and that associated positive effects on milk yield may account for part of the negative genetic correlation. This is at least the seventh example in livestock of an allele that is deleterious in the homozygous state being maintained at high frequency in the populations because of the selective advantage it confers to heterozygotes.”

Source: Science Today

Send this to a friend