Real Science Exchange-Dairy

Dr. Zimmerman presented a Real Science Lecture webinar on December 12th, 2023, titled “Not All Rumen-Protected Products Are Created Equal.” You can find the webinar recording at balchem.com/realscience.  

Clay outlines four attributes of a good rumen-encapsulated product. They are feed and TMR stable, ruminal stable, nutrient bioavailability, and good efficacy biologically in the animal.  (6:21)

Kari describes a TMR stability test that Balchem has been perfecting based on a paper published in 2016. One to two grams of a rumen-protected product (based on the nutrient composition) is mixed with a half pound of TMR in a Ziploc bag, then the mixture incubates for 0, 6, 12 or 24 hours (based on feeding 1x, 2x, or 3x per day). Once a sample is finished incubating, it’s placed in a strainer bag in one liter of distilled water for one minute. Then, the amount of nutrient that was leached into the distilled water is measured. She describes some of the observations and trends they’ve seen from using this technique on different products. (8:24)

Mark asks about the impact of abrasion during the mixing process on encap stability. Kari describes a mineral mix technique using a small ribbon and paddle mixer. In this case, 5-10 pounds of encap product are mixed with 90-95 pounds of a mineral mix for three minutes. Then a sample is analyzed for damage to the encap. Clay does not recommend pelleting any encapsulated product because that will only reduce efficacy. It may not be 100% damage, but it will be significant. (12:41)

Scott asks about the freeze-thaw stability of encapsulates. Clay mentions that all of Balchem’s encapsulated products are freeze-thaw stable. If a product is not, there will be cracks in the coating and some ruminal stability will be lost. (19:34)

When it comes to ruminal stability, matrix encapsulates tend to have lower stability in the rumen, but it varies widely. Some have no ruminal stability; some lose less than 10% in the rumen. Encapsulation is a complex process and there are tradeoffs between some of the steps. For example, between TMR stability or rumen stability and bioavailability, the goal is to find the perfect mix of these to make a high-efficacy product on the farm. Kari describes a rumen stability test that can be conducted on-farm for protected choline and lysine products. Mark describes in situ experiments for rumen stability testing using small Dacron bags in rumen-cannulated animals. He mentions that creating an encap with high rumen stability and high intestinal digestibility is key.  (19:58)

Bioavailability is key, but methodologies for assessing bioavailability are a limitation. Kari and Mark discuss the pros and cons of various in situ/in vivo techniques, including mobile bag, abomasal pulse dose, and stable isotope. (29:25)

Clay mentions that in vitro techniques are a key piece to product development and testing, but may give erroneous results compared to in vivo testing. Kari describes an experiment she conducted with Mark comparing in vivo and in vitro techniques. She suggests that there may be an argument for creating specific in vitro tests built for different types of protected products.  For example, for a pH-sensitive product, a step mimicking abomasal enzymes would be important. For a fat-coated product, a step mimicking intestinal enzymes for fat breakdown would be important. Clay cautions that a product with only in vitro data should be regarded with skepticism. (44:25)

Biological response in the animal is the key final step. Ultimately, you want independent, peer-reviewed data to prove the efficacy of a product. Mark reminds the audience that even if animals don’t respond to a product, there are a host of different issues that could be causing that unrelated to the product being tested. Things like water quality, water quantity, stress, cow comfort - there’s a whole laundry list of things to consider. (50:39)

In closing, Kari recommends that when picking an encap product, ask for the research that hits the four pillars: TMR stability, rumen stability, bioavailability, and animal performance. Mark suggests that you can’t make a bad encap good, but you can make a good encap bad if you aren’t careful. Clay agrees that the more data, the better. Lastly, we need more work on the feed stability pillar which has been overlooked. It is a critical piece to encap products being effective in the field. (55:13)

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

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

This episode comes to you from the “New Developments in Transition Cow Nutrition” seminar in Stoke-on-Trent, England. Dr. Santos, Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Zimmerman spoke at the seminar. Each speaker gives a brief overview of their seminar presentation, and then the panel takes questions from the audience.

In his presentation, Dr. Santos discussed some of the latest research using rumen-protected choline in transition cows. There is substantial evidence that choline plays an important role in transition cow nutrition, particularly because of its consistent positive effect on the yield of energy-corrected milk and benefits that extend beyond the supplementation period. (1:16)

Dr. Reynolds’s presentation focused on protein nutrition in very early lactation cows. Cows are in a substantial negative balance for metabolizable protein in the first week or two postpartum. Recent research, with abomasal infusions of casein, or the amino acids in casein, immediately after calving, has resulted in substantial increases in milk yield. In his lab, Dr. Reynolds has used rumen drenches to supplement cows immediately postpartum as palatability of supplements has been an issue. Providing essential amino acids and total protein to cows immediately after calving is a challenging problem.  (2:10)

Dr. Zimmerman’s presentation discussed differences in rumen encapsulated products. There are four parts of a good ruminant encap: good ruminal stability, good intestinal digestibility, good feed mixing and TMR stability and biological response in the animal. (3:44)

Questions from speakers and attendees were as follows:

What is the optimum level of choline to feed to a transition cow? Given the close relationship between methionine and choline, is there a similar ratio between them like the 3:1 lysine:methionine ratio? (4:56)

Around 98-99% of dietary choline will be degraded in the rumen whereas, with lysine and methionine, we know there's an amount that escapes with the bypass protein fraction of the diets. Has the ruminant animal evolved not to require any bypass choline? (13:46)

Dr. Santos’s presentation focused on the benefits of choline supplementation to the transition cow. What are the benefits for the in-utero calf? (19:45)

What is the mechanism by which choline increases colostrum production? Is it just similar to the effect on milk yield generally? (28:21)

Does choline impact younger or older cows differently? (30:36)

Given the increase in intestinal length and changes in the architecture in early lactation, does this result in suboptimal absorption and scouring? Could it be a nutrient deficiency problem as opposed to something like acidosis? Should we analyze fecal samples to assess this? (34:50)

Do you think fundamentally we are underestimating metabolizable protein requirements in very early lactation? Or are we just not managing that transition particularly well? And if so, what sort of safety factors should we evaluate regarding protein nutrition? (41:45)

In the early lactation studies where metabolizable protein is supplemented in high concentrations, we see big milk and energy-corrected milk responses, but no increase in dry matter intake. Why is that? (43:34)

Dr. Santos describes an experiment in beef cattle, evaluating the inflammation impacts of pneumonia on essential and nonessential amino acids in the gut. This model might be quite similar to that of a dairy cow with metritis. (50:24)

Do you have any recommendations for amino acid supply for cows on grass? Is there anything new coming in that regard? Are there any specific recommendations for synchrony and/or ratios of energy and amino acid supplies? (55:58)

When should amino acids be fed after calving? (1:01:13)

In closing, each panelist provides a take-home message. (1:06:00)

Dr. Santos: Consider choline a required nutrient. 

Dr. Reynolds: Most of our cows have the genetic potential to produce a lot more milk than they are achieving in very early lactation. We need to look at that in terms of how we might be able to help them achieve that potential yield.

Dr. Zimmerman: Not all encaps are created equal. Make sure that you’re able to see published in-vivo research with these products, done by reputable institutions, to prove that these products are working in the animals. 

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

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

Dr. Harvatine gave a presentation on the Real Science Lecture series on April 2nd titled “High Oleic Soybeans, Where Do They Fit Into Dairy Diets?” Access the recording at balchem.com/real science.

As Dr. Harvatine thinks back over his 15 years at Penn State, he didn’t think he’d do much fat supplement work. But we keep getting new questions, new products, and new challenges. One of these is high oleic soybeans, which could be an opportunity to grow some of our own fat on the farm. (6:35)

High oleic soybeans have been around for about seven years or a little longer. They were developed for fry oil (french fries and potato chips), but dairy nutritionists were interested in the opportunity to use 18:1 fats because of their lower risk of milk fat depression. (7:36)

Dr. Davis indicates that high oleic soybeans are a growing piece of the soybeans planted yearly. Seedstock availability is limited, but many companies have it in their pipeline. Pest and weed control traits will eventually be baked into the seedstock, but growers are taking a risk by choosing to grow high oleic soybeans. Dr. Davis’s company offers a premium for high oleic soybeans at their plants to encourage growers to take those risks. (13:15)

What factors should a producer or a nutritionist consider when using high oleic soybeans? Dr. Harvatine sees a couple of different ways folks are feeding soybeans. One, is using expeller soybean meal or roasted soybeans as a RUP source while accounting for the additional fat that it provides, and the other would be pulling the dry fat supplement out of the ration and feeding high levels of roasted soybeans to replace it. He has some hesitations about the latter approach and reminds the audience that high oleic soybeans are not at zero risk for milk-fat depression. Dr. Davis adds that a major consideration is economics. The market has been extremely volatile lately, with very high oil prices, recently, followed by a decline over the last year. As renewable diesel becomes more common and more crush plants come online, we could see depressed meal prices as well. (16:14)

Do we know what amount of oleic acid to be feeding? Dr. Harvatine shares that Dr. Andres Contreras at the Michigan State Vet School has seen molecular changes in adipose tissue metabolism with 50 grams per day of abomasally infused oleic acid, so it seems to be bioactive at reasonably low levels. The challenge, however, is we’re not sure how much actually gets through the rumen from different feed sources. In addition, there may be some interaction between fatty acids and the type of fiber on NDF digestibility that needs to be investigated. (26:50)

A concern with roasted beans compared to extruded products is the potential for higher variability with roasted beans. Dr. Davis gives some examples of considerations dairy farmers need to consider when roasting beans on-farm. (37:16)

Dr. Harvatine and Dr. Davis discuss how dairy producers may be able to take advantage of market volatility and be opportunistic in different settings regarding growing and feeding high oleic soybeans. Both guests agree that soybeans should be used in diets for all their nutrients, protein, RUP, and fat. They caution against pulling it into diets just as a fat supplement and not assessing what it’s doing for the protein side. (43:30)

We've seen a rapid increase in milk fat percentage in the US milk supply over the last few years. Why? Dr. Harvatine points out rapid genetic improvement, a better understanding of mitigating diet-induced milk fat depression, and better use of forages and fiber digestibility. Certainly, palm fat has helped, but it does not explain all of it. Dr. Davis adds that not only have genetics improved, but we have improved nutrition programs to support that genetic potential. (52:14)

In summary, Dr. Davis advises nutritionists and dairy producers to stay flexible as we’re still early on in the high oleic arena. Dr. Harvatine agrees there are great opportunities and lots of decisions to be made for each individual farm. Don’t forget the fundamentals of nutrition when considering this - view high oleic soybeans as a complete package, keeping in mind not only the protein, RUP, and fat but also quality control and roasting. (58:55)

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

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

This journal club episode comes to you from the 2024 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference. The paper is “Assessing Transition Cow Health: Integrating Traditional and Novel Biomarkers” from the conference proceedings with Dr. Andres Contreras of Michigan State University.

What is a biomarker, and what makes a good biomarker? Dr. Contreras defines anything that can help assess a physiological response or pathological state. Two examples would be BHBA (beta-hydroxybutyrate) and NEFA (non-esterified fatty acids), both fat mobilization measures. (2:56)

Dr. Contreras structured the paper in three sections of biomarkers: (3:54)

1. Ones that can be measured by looking at cow records, like how many DAs or hypocalcemias occurred over a period of time.
2. Cow-side measurements like BHBA in urine or blood.
3. Samples must be sent to a lab to be measured. These generally cannot be used to make decisions immediately but can help assess how a transition program is working, for example.

How many samples should be taken, and what cows should be sampled in a commercial dairy setting? Dairy size, pen size, and pocketbook size will all play a role in this decision. Experts usually recommend at least 10 head, and those 10 must represent the cows' population in your pen. If you have the ability to take more samples, Dr. Contreras recommends 10-12% of the cows in question. He then describes ideal times before and after calving to sample BHBA and NEFA for the most predictive value. (5:31)

Setting a target that integrates BHBA and NEFA the first week after calving with measures like body condition score and/or body weight is ideal. Cows will mobilize fat post-calving no matter what, so the goal is to moderate the degree and intensity of fat mobilization. (11:38)

Rumination and activity monitors are great for measuring biomarkers in real-time and are excellent tools for diagnosing problem cows early. Dr. Contreras has researched ultrasounds to measure fat mobilization, but this may not be practical in a commercial setting. Urine pH after calving might start to be a significant predictor of clinical ketosis. Healthy cows will have a higher urine pH than sick cows.  (14:44) 

A transition cow experiences several types of adaptations: lipid mobilization to address negative energy balance, skeletal muscle mobilization to address negative protein/amino acid balance, calcium mobilization to compensate for calcium loss, and oxidative stress due to generating energy. The goal is to target biomarkers that reflect the intensity of those adaptive mechanisms. Many of these require sending samples to a lab. A dairy’s nutritionist, veterinarian, and farm manager work together to create a targeted suite of biomarkers to assess their cows and reach their goals. (21:11)

Inflammation is often at the core of transition cow maladies. Measuring a panel of acute phase proteins the first week after calving and comparing the dynamics of how they occur through the year could help identify issues in closeup cows if those proteins are spiking. (26:03)

The group discusses the importance of using individual herds’ baseline data for prediction and assessment and focusing on closeup cows when fresh cow problems arise. They also discuss biomarkers for excessive protein catabolism and a liver functionality index. This leads to a discussion of whether creating an index might be a better overall measure than making decisions on just one diagnostic value. What if someday there might be one perfect predictive biomarker, and what might that look like? (27:50)

In summary, you should not rely on a single biomarker and start measuring early. Ideally, this would be in the dry period. If that’s too challenging, it would be at least a few days after cows go to the closeup pen. Cow-side biomarkers like BHBA, body condition score, and body weight can tell you a lot about transition cow health. Use all the biomarkers and herd records available to design your approach to transition cow health. (43:10)

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

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

This journal club episode comes to you from the 2024 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference. The paper is “Major Accomplishments in Calf Nutrition and Growth” from the conference proceedings.

Accelerated milk feeding of calves results in about a thousand-pound first lactation production increase. The mechanism is unclear: it could be isolated to the mammary gland or related to the functional ability of the digestive tract and liver to support lactation. Economic analyses have shown an advantage of $205 per calf. (6:04)

Regarding amino acid requirements of dairy calves, whey-based milk replacers require additional methionine; lysine is also common. Threonine can be limiting in soy-based milk replacers. Establishing amino acid requirements was beyond the scope of what the NASEM committee could do, and more data is probably needed for calves. However, CNCPS has amino acid requirements defined, so it’s possible to get in the ballpark for amino acids. (12:00)

What about feeding hay to young calves? The latest research has shown calves only over-consume alfalfa out of all the common forages. A study in Spain showed when offered alfalfa, calves consumed 14% of their total dry matter from alfalfa, decreasing the amount of starter they consumed. When offered grass hay or straw, calves only consumed 4-5% forage and they actually boosted starter intake and overall feed efficiency. Dr. Drackley recommends starting grass hay, wheat straw, or similar forages at 2-3 weeks of age. It should be just a sprinkling top dressed on their starter, or about 5% of the total if you’re feeding a mixed diet. (15:08)

Dr. Drackley covers five major accomplishments in this paper. (18:06)

1. Knowledge of colostrum, highlighting the establishment of different categories for passive transfer (excellent, good, fair, and poor) rather than just a yes or no. The four categories relate very well to the mortality and morbidity associated with young calves. 
2. Feeding more milk to young calves, highlighting a 2001 paper from Dr. Mike Van Amburgh’s lab that was the eye opener for the industry. 
3. The publication of the NRC in 2001, which had a separate chapter for calves, was perhaps the first time people started to think seriously about calves.
4. Major growth in behavior research, particularly related to feeding behavior, shows calves fed conventional, limited amounts of milk are hungry as demonstrated by vocalization and increased restlessness.
5. Publication of NASEM 2021.

From a welfare research perspective, Dr. Drackley thinks cow-calf separation and group vs hutch housing will continue to be issues of concern for consumers. In Europe, there’s demonstration research keeping calves with cows during the milk-feeding period. (20:44)

What about the post-weaning slump? The big issue is weaning too early before starter intake has increased adequately. Weaning at eight weeks instead of six weeks results in an improvement in total nutrient intake. A gradual step down in the amount of milk provided will also stimulate starter intake. Starter quality and composition is critical, and water availability can be an issue for many farms. (23:29) 

Concerning colostrum, a big advancement has been a better understanding of what colostrum does in addition to establishing passive immunity. The nutrition aspects of high protein, vitamins, minerals, and growth-promoting ingredients like hormones, growth factors, and cytokines all play a major role in calf health and development. Measuring colostrum quality is better and easier with the use of refractometers. Recent emphasis on how easily colostrum can be contaminated and how that negatively affects the calf has also been crucial. As much as we know about milk synthesis, we know very little about colostrum synthesis. Adequate metabolizable protein is important for quality and quantity, and immune-related vitamins and minerals are important. Beyond that, we do not have a good understanding of what regulates colostrum, particularly volume. (25:50)

What’s next in calf nutrition? Establishing a good amino acid model and trying to minimize both costs and nitrogen excretion, colostrum quality and quantity from the cow side, continued research into workable systems for accelerated milk feeding with a smooth weaning transition, and post-weaning feeding programs are areas where Dr. Drackley predicts fruitful research opportunities. (31:36)

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

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

This journal club episode comes to you from the 2024 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference. The paper is “Practical Aspects of Reducing Carbon Footprint by Dairy Farms Through Feeding” from the conference proceedings.

In the U.S., livestock competes with oil and gas for the top source of methane emissions. While “carbon-neutral” agriculture may be easy for modelers to show, Dr. Hristov feels this is misleading and probably impossible in practical dairy farming. However, mitigation can be addressed in several directions, and nutrition can have perhaps the largest impact. Management practices, genetic selection, and manure management can be added to achieve large reductions in total methane from an intensive dairy production system. (2:43)

As forage digestibility increases, methane yield and intensity will decrease. A forage with higher digestibility may gain a 10-15% improvement in methane intensity compared to a lower digestible forage. In addition, starch makes less methane than NDF does. Feedlot cattle produce half the methane of a normal dairy cow due to the increased starch in the feedlot diet. We know fats and lipids can decrease methane, but anything higher than 5-6% in the diet will disturb rumen function and lead to poorer performance. Comparing different forages, corn silage produces the least methane, with alfalfa in second place. (6:41)

Feed additives have the potential to deliver compounds for methane mitigation. One of these is 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP), the commercial version of which was developed in Europe. It is approved in Europe and Latin American countries. Australia and New Zealand are also working through the approval process. This compound inhibits the MCR enzyme (methyl coenzyme M reductase) which catalyzes the last step in methanogenesis. Dr. Hristov’s lab has consistently shown a 30% reduction in methane yield when diets containing 3-NOP are fed, with no impact on milk production and a slight increase in milk fat. 3-NOP is quickly metabolized, so it is most useful in a confinement system where it can continuously enter the rumen. The compound is stable in a TMR for up to 24 hours, and the optimum inclusion rate is 60-80 milligrams per kilogram of diet (60-80 ppm). (14:41)

Regarding regulatory approval in the U.S., the FDA has indicated that 3-NOP must be approved as a drug, not as a feed additive. Dr. Hristov has concerns about an adaptation of the cows to the compound. One study in Holland fed 3-NOP for a year, and there was a definite decrease in efficacy over time. Furthermore, efficacy may depend on diet, as 3-NOP is less effective with high NDF diets. It’s unclear if the decrease in efficacy over time is because the microbes break down 3-NOP before it affects methane synthesis or if the microbes shift to a different pathway of methane synthesis. (22:04)

Bromoform, a compound found in red seaweeds, is also a powerful methane mitigator. Dr. Hristov’s lab has observed 60-65% decreases in methane production early in the feeding period, dropping to 20-25% after 200 days. Other issues include the practicality of growing and transporting seaweed, the instability of bromoform, and the fact that bromoform is an ozone-depleting compound and a carcinogen. Seaweed extracts tend to decrease dry matter intake, and thus milk production and milk iodine increase dramatically. (25:54)

In the U.S. dairy system, where manure is usually handled as a liquid, methane emissions from manure and from the cow are equal. Methane digesters and flaring of methane are common mitigation methods. Acidification is another method whereby decreasing pH can decrease methane emissions and ammonia and nitrous oxide losses. Dr. Hristov predicts a lot of additives to decrease methane emissions from manure will eventually be available on the market. (31:16)

3-NOP has little effect on rumen dynamics but may increase butyrate. Dr. Weiss asks if different feed additives have synergistic effects, and Dr. Hristov thinks much more work is needed in this arena. (33:19)

While methane mitigation probably has no silver bullet, many little interventions can add up to a big impact. Looking forward, so many people are working in this area; we will have solutions for methane mitigation. (43:56)

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

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

This journal club episode comes to you from the 2024 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference. The paper is “Methane in the context of circular dairy farming” from the conference proceedings.

What is circular dairy farming? The concept is that instead of extracting or using natural resources and then discarding the wastes in a linear kind of fashion, economies should try to be increasingly circular. This would include the concepts of reusing, recycling, upgrading, upcycling, etc. Traditionally, the focus on methane was about the inefficiency and leakage of energy and finding a way to minimize that from the perspective of energetic efficiency and productivity. More recently, the focus on decreasing methane has been the environment. (3:19)

Dr. Newbold talks about the trade-off between circularity and methane. High fiber diets produce more methane than high starch diets. Adding fat to diets can also decrease methane production. However, starch and fat are human edible so if we leave starch and fat in feeds to decrease methane in dairy cattle, that leaves less starch and fat for human consumption. The concept of “local” also plays into circularity, whether that be feed production or milk processing. (7:01)

What are the metrics of circularity? Two approaches to this present in the literature. The first is  human edible efficiency: how much human edible food are we producing? In a dairy setting, the measurement would be how much human edible food are we putting into the cow compared to the amount of human edible food coming out of the system? The second metric is the alternatives for land use. (10:45)

What is the best way to express methane production? Dr. Newbold shares three, and they are generally used in different contexts. First is methane production, usually presented as grams per cow per day. This is an easily scalable measurement, but may not be the best or easiest way to manage interventions on-farm. The second common metric is methane yield which is generally expressed as grams per kilogram of dry matter intake. Lastly, methane emissions intensity is grams of methane per kilogram of milk. (12:26)

When considering the human edibility equation, the denominator consists of the human edible content of the feed. In principle, depending on how hard you worked and how much money you spent, you could extract some of the starch, fat, and protein and use it for human food. However, there's no consensus in the literature about this kind of edibility coefficient. In other words, what proportion of the protein in soybean meal or the proportion of starch that's left in wheat middlings or distillers grains is human edible? Greater consensus about what is and what is not human edible would actually be quite useful in allowing for better and more consistent calculations. (18:29)

Dr. Newbold gives examples of relative efficiency comparing U.S. dairy production, a grass-based system, and a tropical grass based system. Each of these have a different human edible efficiency and a different amount of methane produced. (19:59)

When it comes to lowering the environmental impact of milk production, don't focus on one metric in isolation of the rest of them. If you're setting off in a particular direction, whether that's trying to drive methane down or milk production up, think about the potential trade offs and unforeseen consequences. (32:12)

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

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

This episode comes to you from the 2024 Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference, where Balchem sponsored a Real Science symposium titled “New Discussions in Amino Acid Nutrition.” Each of our guests presented at the symposium, and their presentations can be found at balchem.com/realsciencemedia

Dr. Van Amburgh presented “Amino Acid Nutrition for Maximizing Milk Component Yield.” When considering nitrogen efficiency, we generally compare intake nitrogen, which includes non-protein nitrogen, against milk nitrogen. In high producing cows, aggregate amino acid values are running about 70 to 73% efficiency. But when we work that up to total intake nitrogen, then we're down to 30 to 35% efficiency range. How do we reconcile ruminal nitrogen requirements to a point where we can optimize the capture of recycled nitrogen and reduce the amount of nitrogen that's being excreted in the urine? (2:27)

Dr. Hanigan presented “Understanding Amino Acid Bioavailability.” Our current methods for measuring bioavailability don’t all have the same precision. One of the classic methods, intestinal disappearance, has very low precision. Methods that rely on dilution of a marker or a label in blood or milk have much higher precision. Dr. Hanigan’s lab has worked to modify a carbon-13 labeled amino acid method to allow for evaluating changes in the supply of amino acids in the diet.  (5:01)

Dr. Lee presented “Current Understandings of Lysine Nutrition in Dairy Cattle.” Rumen-protected lysine has more variable responses than rumen-protected methionine or histidine. Amino acid requirements were developed based on the role of amino acids as the building blocks of protein. But there are many roles of amino acids which may influence their requirements. Dr. Lee suggests including that type of information in our modeling may increase the consistency of responses to feeding rumen-protected lysine. (11:24)

Dr. Hristov presented “Histidine: A Limiting Amino Acid for Dairy Cows.” His group has worked with rumen-protected histidine to develop a dataset to define requirements. Microbial protein has considerably less histidine than methionine yet they are secreted at about the same level in milk and are metabolized similarly. All this together points to a higher histidine requirement. (18:02)

The panelists agree that the advent of genomics have resulted in a rapid change in high producing cows and with that, their amino acid requirements (and other nutrients) are also changing. It’s a challenge for feeding and nutrition programs to keep up with rapid genetic change. (21:02)

A question was posed by the audience about how Dr. Van Amburgh used amino acids to increase butter fat. In the research he presented, the diets did not overfeed fat and fed a blend of fatty acids, and also increased the sugar and pulled back the starch. (28:35)

A discussion of histidine follows, including its unique body reserves, its role in hemoglobin concentrations, and its potential impacts on metabolic energy efficiency (34:08)

Dr. Zimmerman asks about plasma histidine in very early lactation cows. Dr. Hristov is currently conducting a fresh cow experiment to assess this. His hypothesis is that because of low dry matter intake and high metabolic demand for amino acids, there will be a response to histidine supplementation. Dr. Lee agrees and feels that the fresh cow stage may be one of the most practical ways we can utilize rumen-protected histidine (39:39)

A question from the audience about the use of blood meal in lower protein diets sparks a spirited discussion among the panelists. (41:55)

In closing, each panelist provides a takeaway. Responses range from bioavailability of rumen-protected products to challenges to progress for ruminant amino acid research to comparing biological potential and economic response. (46:58)

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

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

While Dr. Jardon only had milk in his glass for this pubcast, he did share about his bottle of “wheyskey” (whiskey made from whey) from Wheyward Spirit Distillery in California (https://www.wheywardspirit.com/). Iowa State Dairy Extension is offering a webinar, “Fermentation and Distillation of Whey to Produce Spirits at Copper Crow,” on May 15 at noon Central. Curtis Basina of Copper Crow Distillery in Bayfield, WI, will be the speaker. You can sign up for the webinar at https://go.iastate.edu/WHEY (4:13)

Dr. Dhuyvetter presented a March 5 webinar on dairy economics, which can be found at balchem.com/realscience. Key consistent data across time indicate that more profitable dairies tend to be larger. This doesn’t mean that all dairies must be large, but more the reality of the large number of fixed costs in dairying. Diluting costs by having high production per cow is also a mark of a profitable operation. Kevin reminds the audience that he’s talking about averages and there are exceptions to every rule. The key message is that you need to strive to get better. In the long run, profits are equal to zero in a competitive industry, and dairying is no exception. Dr. Dhuyvetter includes all economic costs in his analyses, recognizing all assets, including skills and capital, such as land, facilities, and time. (8:08)

Dr. Jardon suggests that exceptional operations emphasize efficiency and ensure they dilute maintenance costs well. Everything is fine-tuned: feed's always pushed up, stalls are full of bedding, and the time budget of the cows is usually spot on. Dr. Tully echoes this sentiment from his consultant experience. Phil also underlines the importance of focusing on how much it costs to make a unit of milk or income over feed costs rather than concentrating solely on saving money. Kevin agrees that all the little things done right and done consistently often make the difference in profitability. Further, if cutting costs negatively impacts production, then saving money is counterproductive in the long run (15:14)

Dr. Dhuyvetter reminds producers not to automatically assume they have lower costs because you raise your own feed. More often than not, the opportunity costs of producing that feed haven’t been evaluated. If you can produce nutrients more efficiently and cost-effectively on your land, then home-raised feed is a very good thing. But if you produce low-quality home-raised feed, it might be better to purchase feed elsewhere. In addition, growing high-quality feeds takes time and energy away from dairying. Phil saw this when he was a practicing veterinarian. Jim suggests that those larger operations can have a field crew and a herd health crew who aren’t the same individuals. The panelists discuss the shift from getting paid for protein in milk to getting paid for fat in milk and what that means from a cow nutrition and profitability perspective.

(22:51)

Dr. Dhuyvetter then discusses how culling practices impact profitability. He expects successful operations to have very low cull rates because they have healthy, well-managed cows doing all the little things right. On the other hand, unsuccessful operations may also have very low cull rates because they struggle to produce heifers, get them pregnant, and keep them in the herd, leading to keeping cows longer than one should. Jim and Kevin emphasize that the culling rate is individualized and will vary by operation. Phil suggests that perhaps some of the available software tools to help with culling decisions may be underutilized. (35:10)

Many dairies want to know if they should wait longer into lactation before rebreeding cows. Because production is up and reproduction has improved over the last 10-15 years, dairies are drying cows off while still giving a lot of milk. Dr. Dhuyvetter’s analysis of the data for Holstein herds in second- and greater-lactation cows suggests getting them pregnant as fast as possible and getting them back to peak milk sooner. (43:07)

Phil, Kevin, and Jim then touch on comparative advantage and revealed preference and how those relate to shifts in the dairy industry away from some states and toward others. (50:29)

In closing, Dr. Dhuyvetter suggests that the days of being very successful with gut-feel decisions are probably behind us. Making decisions based on the best information from data and analytics is the way forward. Constantly strive to get better, and don’t worry about what your neighbor’s doing. Control what you can control. (58:29)

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

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

Dr. Penner describes two primary factors of gut health to be absorption and barrier function or permeability. His lab’s work on permeability is suggesting that intestinal regions really drive total gut permeability to a much greater extent than ruminal permeability in dairy cows. (7:06)

Ms. Bertens is Dr. Penner’s Ph.D. student and explains some new methodologies she developed for measuring gut permeability using chromium EDTA and cobalt EDTA. It’s common to use an oral dose of chromium EDTA as a marker to measure total tract permeability. Claire’s work, using cannulated cows, used a ruminal dose of chromium EDTA for total tract permeability and an abomasal dose of cobalt EDTA for post-ruminal permeability. Both of these markers are indigestible, non-metabolizable and have no transcellular transport mechanisms. Claire is working to publish the new method as a complete validation study has been completed. (9:15)

While this method is currently limited to using cannulated animals, Greg and Claire could envision a less sophisticated and more applied on-farm technique to assess permeability. Until then, there are still a lot of management observations that can identify potential issues with gut permeability. The appearance of feces and the presence of mucin casts can both be indicative of gut issues. Certainly dry matter intake is a major influencer on gut health, and Claire also sees potential in new technologies like rumination collars or rumination ear tags. (13:47)

Are there certain time points in a dairy cow’s life when she is at risk for increased gut permeability? Dr. Penner describes research suggesting if weaning is implemented too abruptly, that really increases the risk for decreased barrier function of the gut. Erratic feed intake patterns resulting from withholding feed for any reason at any age can also increase the risk of leaky gut. For example, depressed intake during the transition phase, along with anything that drives a response through an underlying systemic inflammatory response, probably creates risky situations for leaky gut. Claire is currently running a study looking at the impacts of intramammary LPS infusion on gut function. Greg envisions that learning more about gut function could create a new philosophy for treating sick animals. In the past, only antimicrobials were used to treat mastitis, but now it’s common to also treat with a NSAID for pain. Perhaps in the future, we will also provide treatment to accelerate the recovery of the gut to prevent secondary disorders. (16:15)

How long does an off-feed event have to last to cause an issue in the gut? It seems a fairly acute time period is all that is needed. Most studies are trying to replicate what happens on-farm, for example during mastitis, heat stress or the transition period. Greg indicates that not only will permeability be impacted, but ruminal absorptive capacity can also decline rapidly in these conditions. In Claire’s LPS challenge study, cows’ rectal temperatures peak around six hours after the LPS infusion and usually resolve within 12 hours. But most cows do not eat for a solid 12 hours during the challenge, and they are slow to recover feed intake over the next few days. In cows that aren’t sick but experience feed restriction in experimental protocols, they tend to overeat when they are allotted the full ration and this can lead to ruminal acidosis. (21:57)

Increased incidences of liver abscesses in beef-on-dairy calves are being reported in the industry. Dr. Penner speculates that perhaps these calves are not always achieving adequate passive transfer, and may not be receiving high enough levels of milk replacer to support a more robust immune system. It may be the increased beef cattle genetics in the calves are putting an added requirement on growth or muscle development that may not be met by lower levels of milk replacer or even lower colostrum feeding levels. (34:40)

In closing, providing cows with a consistent environment where they can meet their needs by their own behavior such as free access to feed when hungry and to a comfortable stall when it’s time to rest. Cows reward consistency with health and production. Gut health in a commercial setting is a relevant issue and it might go undiagnosed or undetected. Research into where in the gut permeability is occurring will help define strategies to modulate response. While off-feed events for individual animals might be harder to recognize in a large dairy environment, new technology may allow for earlier diagnosis. (40:43)

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

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