IHFA Cork Club 27th Jan 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reproduction management for longevity Dr Carel Muller Western Cape Department of Agriculture, Institute for Animal Production, Elsenburg Dairy Information.
Advertisements

Impact of selection for increased daughter fertility on productive life and culling for reproduction H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright*, R. H. Miller Animal Improvement.
Bull selection based on QTL for specific environments Fabio Monteiro de Rezende Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE) - Brazil.
Introduction to Beef & Dairy.  In the past cattle were bred for three main reasons: 1. To provide milk 2. To provide beef 3. To aid in farming – pulling.
ADSA 2002 (HDN-P1) 2002 Comparison of occurrence and yields of daughters of progeny-test and proven bulls in artificial insemination and natural- service.
AI Promotion Breeding Future Profits. Breeding Workshop for Stakeholders. March 2006.
THE ISRAELI BREEDING PROGRAM elite cows selected based on their genetic evaluations. About ½ of these cows are mated to local elite bulls, and.
How Genomics is changing Business and Services of Associations Dr. Josef Pott, Weser-Ems-Union eG, Germany.
 87 of the top 100 active proven TPI sires are descendants of Planet, O Man, Shottle and Goldwyn.  58 descendants of O Man  32 descendants of Shottle.
But who will be the next GREAT one?. USA Bull Proofs * Bulls are ranked based upon their DAUGHTER’S (progeny) production and physical characteristics.
2007 Jana L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD , USA
Reproductive Management of Dairy Cows with Particular Reference to Organic Systems Michael G Diskin & Frank Kelly Animal Production Research Centre,
Leaving Certificate Agricultural Science
Sourcing the Dairy Herd James O’Loughlin, Teagasc.
Agenda Item 1 Current situation: Market trends. Beef and veal consumption robust at around 300,000 tonnes each year.
George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD National Association.
ABS Real World Data ® Bull Fertility November 2012.
 Breeding Heifers Mark Carson Reproductive Specialist, EastGen.
Comparison of Holstein service-sire fertility for heifer and cow breedings with conventional and sexed semen H. D. Norman*, J. L. Hutchison, and P. M.
2002 ADSA 2002 (HDN-1) H.D. NORMAN* ( ), R.H. MILLER, P.M. V AN RADEN, and J.R. WRIGHT Animal Improvement Programs.
Norway (1) 2005 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service,
2006 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA Fertility Trait.
การปรับปรุงพันธุ์โค นม Dairy Improvement By Mr.Wuttigrai Boonkum Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture.
AFGC Convention 2004 (1) 2004 Possibilities for Improving Dairy Cattle Performance Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.
Introduction.  In the past cattle were bred for three main reasons: 1. To provide milk 2. To provide beef 3. To aid in farming – pulling ploughs etc.
2007 Paul VanRaden, Mel Tooker, Jan Wright, Chuanyu Sun, and Jana Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD National Association of Animal.
H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA San Antonio.
H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Missouri Dairy Summit.
Synchronization Effects on Parameters for Days Open M. T. Kuhn, J. L. Hutchison, and R. H. Miller* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural.
Why is it important for Geno to establish research collaboration with the U.S? Sverre Bjørnstad Sverre Bjørnstad.
2003 P.M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Genetic Evaluations.
2006 Mid-Atlantic Dairy Grazing Conference, 2006 (1) Is There a Need for Different Genetics in Dairy Grazing Systems? H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L.
2006 H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD
XX International Grassland Conference 2005 (1) 2005 Genetic Alternatives for Dairy Producers who Practise Grazing H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L. Powell.
Beef Data & Genomics Programme Information Meetings 2015 Teagasc Beef Specialists.
Genetic and environmental factors that affect gestation length H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, M. T. Kuhn, S. M. Hubbard,* and J. B. Cole Animal Improvement.
H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA 2009 meeting.
H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD , USA EAAP.
Multi-trait, multi-breed conception rate evaluations P. M. VanRaden 1, J. R. Wright 1 *, C. Sun 2, J. L. Hutchison 1 and M. E. Tooker 1 1 Animal Genomics.
H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Dairy Cattle Reproductive.
CRI – Spanish update (1) 2010 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.
Bull Selection: Beef Kay Farmer Madison County High School edited by Billy Moss and Rachel Postin July 2001.
Cattle Breeding in Ireland.
ICBF Beef & Dairy Industry Meeting. 22 May 2015.
Fundamentals of the Eurostar evaluations
Genetics – Applications to Agriculture
Genetic diversity of sires used in the Irish dairy industry
W. Ryan1,2, D. Hennessy1, J. J. Murphy1, T. M. Boland2 and L
Net Merit Changes April 2017.
Jeremy Bryant NZ Animal Evaluation Ltd Manager
Validation of €uro-Star Replacement Index.
ICBF Dairy Industry Meeting.
Lifetime Performance of Dairy Cows in Northern Ireland
Changes in animal performance and profitability of Holstein dairy operations after introduction of crossbreeding with Montbéliarde, Normande, and Scandinavian.
Test Day Model - Update.
Value of Sexed Semen Victor E. Cabrera
Drought and fodder crisis What cows should I cull?
Correlations Among Measures of Dairy Cattle Fertility and Longevity
A National Sire Fertility Index
Daughter Proven or Genomic Bulls?
Sire Proofs.
Domestic vs. imported AI semen for Holstein graziers in the US
Use of a threshold animal model to estimate calving ease and stillbirth (co)variance components for US Holsteins.
Where AIPL Fits In Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the main research arm of USDA (8,000 employees with 2,000 scientists at >100 locations) Beltsville.
Data Holstein breedings from 2006 through 2008 Total breedings
Extent of sexed-semen usage
Alternatives for evaluating daughter performance of progeny-test bulls between official evaluations Abstr. #10.
Effectiveness of genetic evaluations in predicting daughter performance in individual herds H. D. Norman 1, J. R. Wright 1*, C. D. Dechow 2 and R. C.
Relationship of gestation length to stillbirth
Economics of Reproduction: the Quality of the Pregnancy
Presentation transcript:

IHFA Cork Club 27th Jan 2014

For tonight…. Sexed Semen Update on EBI

The future role for sexed semen in the Irish dairy industry

Sexed semen CR 75% of Conventional: ie. 50% vs. 37% Recommended for use on heifers only Drop in CR not suitable for Irish seasonal system NZ data suggest near-normal CR with fresh sexed 4

Field trial Establish the potential of sexed semen in Ireland dairy cows and heifers Dairy trial carried out in Spring 2013 Industry partnerships and funding 15,000 inseminations 392 farmers, 100 AI technicians 5

Holstein Friesian - Study Design 6

Data collection All insems recorded on handhelds directly to ICBF Pregnancy diagnosis and BCS on ~ 4000 animals 2000 animals scanned and sexed Full results with calves on the ground in 2014 7

Effect of sexing on conception rate Heifers (n = 1478) Treatment CR to 1st Service CR as a % of Conventional Conventional 53% 100% Sexed Fresh 1m 39% 75% Sexed Fresh 2m 46% 87% Sexed Frozen Cows (n = 1684) Treatment CR to 1st Service CR as a % of Conventional Conventional 49% 100% Sexed Fresh 1m 32% 64% Sexed Fresh 2m 37% 76% Sexed Frozen 42% 85% 8

Overall (sexed treatments only) Sex ratio by treatment Treatment Number of pregnancies Heifer calves % heifer calves Conventional 244 134 55.0% Sexed Fresh 1m 138 125 90.8% Sexed Fresh 2m 154 139 90.2% Sexed Frozen 172 156 90.7% Overall (sexed treatments only) 464 420 90.5% 9

Sire * Treatment Comparisons

Herd variation in conception rate 11

Effect of BCS on conception rate Cow mean BCS =2.8 Heifer mean BCS = 3.3 12

Effect of DIM at insemination on conception rate Days in milk at insemination 13

Where to now? Very pleased with the sexed frozen results in general Wide range of views at farm level – strong view emerging that on-going research is needed, one year is not enough Real challenges for AI companies in terms of their business Less dairy semen Potential for low conception rates Clearly it won’t be suitable for everyone – strong technical performance at farm level is a pre-requisite 14

So for 2014…. Calves starting to hit the ground, a real buzz with seeing heifer after heifer arriving Won’t be a lab in Ireland this Spring, but will be a stock of trial semen from last year and from other sources Looking to set up a longer term arrangement in conjunction with AI companies, Teagasc Research and Wider Agri-Industry from 2015 onwards.

Acknowledgements 16

EBI News Base Change Test Day Model Health and Disease Traits

Base Change Change € Change Overall Milk -114.5 Fat -5.4 Protein -6 -32 CI 2.8 SUR -0.96 -44 -76 Parity Num. Cows Milk Kg Fat Kg Protein Kg Fat % Prot % CIV 1 59,894 5540 216 188 3.90 3.39 399 2 53,871 6248 244 3.91 3.46 3 45,769 6587 258 227 3.92 3.45 397 4 36,331 7053 276 392 5 24,571 7026 277 243 3.94 381 1 - OLD 73,000 5194 197 171 3.79 3.30 404

Base Change Introduction of new models (TDM), or Economic Values may cause re-ranking however a base change DOES NOT cause a change in bull rankings Each animal is affected equally Necessary to ensure people can compare their animals to a relevant group of cows Current plan to introduce this August

Test Day Model Test Day Model for Milk Production a more effective way to do milk evaluations The most common model around the world We got high correlations with existing results for both bulls (0.97) and cows (0.92) but….. Some of the results around FAT were not satisfactory and we were not happy that the proofs were correct We have submitted another test run to Interbull, but still not happy that we have got to the bottom of the issue

Genetics of Health and Disease Genetics of health and disease will be a key focus area It is the next ‘Fertility’ issue to be dealt with Similar discussions as we had with fertility Breeding can’t solve it Heritability is too low Etc Kicking off a Pilot project (100 herds)

BVD – sire prevalence D Berry, Teagasc

TB – sire prevalence Ian Richardson D Berry, Teagasc

Questions?