TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    Life Sciences

    Real Science Exchange-Dairy

    Balchem Real Science Exchange isn’t just any old boring podcast. You’ll get to know top researchers like you’ve never known them before. Go behind the scenes and hear the conversations that take place over a few drinks with friends. Join us as we discuss the hot topics in animal science and share a range of new ideas.

    Advertise

    Copyright: © 2020 Balchem Animal Nutrition & Health

    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    Domestic Investments in Dairy: The Future is Bright (Tariffs) with Gregg Doud, National Milk Producers Federation; Corey Geiger, CoBank; Dan Siemers, Siemers Holsteins Apr 22, 2025
    Show notes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    New Tools to Assess and Optimize Forage Quality and Diet Formulation with Dr. John Goeser, Rock River Laboratory, Inc.; Dr. Bob Kozlowski, PAS, Dairy NExT, LLC; Dr. Tom Overton, Cornell University Apr 15, 2025
    Show notes

    This episode was recorded at the 2025 Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. Panelists Dr. John Goeser or Rock River Laboratory, Inc.; Dr. Bob Kozlowski, PAS of Dairy NExT, LLC and Dr. Tom Overton of Cornell University introduce themselves and give an overview of their backgrounds. (0:10)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Nutrient Requirements of Pre-Weaning Calves with Dr. Jim Drackley, Professor Emeritus, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Dr. Rick Lundquist, Nutrition Professionals Inc.; Dr. Tom Overton, Cornell University Apr 08, 2025
    Show notes

    Dr. Drackley begins with an overview of his presentation at the 2025 Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium, focusing on the NASEM requirements for pre-weaned calves. He mentions some differences in energy and protein requirement calculations compared to the NRC system, as well as increased vitamin E recommendations and a more biologically based factorial approach to calculating mineral requirements. (5:59)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Feeding Rumen-Protected Choline During the Peri-Conceptional Period Programs Postnatal Phenotype of Calves with Dr. Masroor Sagheer, University of Florida and Dr. Pete Hansen, University of Florida Apr 01, 2025
    Show notes

    Dr. Hansen’s lab conducted several in vitro experiments where choline chloride was supplemented to beef embryo culture media for the first seven days of embryonic development. Calves resulting from the choline-supplemented embryos were consistently 17-20 kilograms heavier at weaning. In the feeding experiment presented at the Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium, Dr. Sagheer fed rumen-protected choline to beef cows one day before AI through seven days post-AI, spanning ovulation, fertilization, and the first seven days of embryo development. In contrast to the in vitro studies, calves born to cows supplemented with choline during the peri-conception period were lighter at weaning than control calves. The panel discusses potential mechanisms of action for these results, including choline’s role as a methyl donor potentially impacting the epigenetic programming of the embryo.


    Beef on Dairy Cattle - Economic Decision Making on the Farm with Dr. Corwin Nelson, University of Florida; Dr. Tara Felix, Penn State University; Dr. Brad Johnson, Texas Tech University Mar 25, 2025
    Show notes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Beef on Dairy Cattle - Advancing Beef Quality to the Next Level with Dr. Brad Johnson, Texas Tech University; Dr. Tara Felix, Penn State University Mar 18, 2025
    Show notes

    This episode was recorded at the 2025 Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. Dr. Johnson and Dr. Felix begin with brief descriptions of their background. (1:26)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    How Beef on Dairy Selection Impacts Beef and Dairy Production with Dr. Tara Felix, Penn State University; Dr. Brad Johnson, Texas Tech University Mar 11, 2025
    Show notes

    This episode was recorded at the 2025 Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. Dr. Felix and Dr. Johnson begin with brief descriptions of their background and interest in beef on dairy research. (3:15)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    The Benefits of Mitigating Heat Stress in Dairy Cattle with Dr. Lance Baumgard, Iowa State University Mar 04, 2025
    Show notes

    This Real Science Exchange podcast episode was recorded during a webinar from Balchem’s Real Science Lecture Series. You can find it at balchem.com/realscience.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Potential for low-forage diets to maintain milk production in forage-limited situations with Dr. Adam Lock, Michigan State University; Dr. Bill Weiss, Professor Emeritus, The Ohio State University Feb 25, 2025
    Show notes

    In times of limited forage, dairy producers may need to feed diets lower in forage than is typical but would like to maintain milk production. In this study, two diets similar in neutral detergent fiber (NDF), starch, and crude protein with different amounts of forage were fed to 32 mid-lactation Holstein cows in a crossover design. The control diet (CON) contained high forage (55.5% of diet dry matter) with no supplemental fatty acids or amino acids. The low-forage diet (LF) contained 36.6% forage along with supplemental fat and rumen-protected methionine and lysine. As forage was removed from the LF diet, it was replaced with byproducts and high-moisture corn was replaced with dry corn. (4:42)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Transitioning to Success: The Intersection Between Nutrition, Health and Reproduction with Dr. Jose Santos, University of Florida Feb 18, 2025
    Show notes

    This Real Science Exchange podcast episode was recorded during a webinar from Balchem’s Real Science Lecture Series. You can find it at balchem.com/realscience.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    Previous 1 7 8 9 10 11 23 Next

    Related Podcasts

    Science Friday

    1

    Science Friday Astronomy
    The Naked Scientists Podcast

    2

    The Naked Scientists Podcast Life Sciences
    Stuff To Blow Your Mind

    3

    Stuff To Blow Your Mind Life Sciences
    Stuff To Blow Your Mind

    4

    Stuff To Blow Your Mind Life Sciences
    Brain Science with Ginger Campbell, MD: Neuroscience for Everyone

    5

    Brain Science with Ginger Campbell, MD: Neuroscience for Everyone Health & Fitness
    All In The Mind

    6

    All In The Mind Government & Organizations
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights