Dr. Hristov gave a webinar titled “Histidine: a limiting amino acid for dairy cows” on March 4, 2025, and joins the podcast in this episode for a deeper dive into the topic. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Earlier this year, Balchem and Progressive Dairy Magazine partnered to create a new webinar series, The Real Producer Exchange. In this podcast episode, Scott and Walt reflect on the first webinar in the series, where Clare Alderink from Brian Ryzebol Dairy was the featured producer. Walt gives an overview of the premise and setup of the webinar series along with a brief overview of Clare’s background and current operation. Walt and Scott go on to share some excerpts from the webinar. (0:33)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Petfood Forum in Kansas City, Missouri. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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