ABS Australia 2018 Beef Conference Presentations

ABS Beef Conference Albury March 2018

Introduction to Genus & ABS • Genus Plc, the parent company, is listed on the London Stock Exchange (GNS on FTSE 250) • Genus has 4 main business entities – – – –

ABS - the world’s largest bovine genetic company PIC - the world’s leading porcine genetics company IVB - the largest IVF business in the world Promar – International Agri-Food consultancy

What does Genus & ABS do?

Produce differentiated animal genetics

Driving genetic improvement faster than ever,...

Efficiently Distribute these genetics

...delivering improvement to our customers more quickly and efficiently...

Share in the value delivered

...and capturing a share of the value we deliver to our customers

3

Our Vision “Pioneering animal genetic improvement to help nourish the world�

Dairy

Pork

Beef

GENETIC IMPROVEMENT

SHARED PROPRIETARY TECHNOLOGY PLATFORM GENOMIC SELECTION

BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING GENOME SCIENCE

GENE EDITING

Genetic gain example Progress in 40 years

+7 +50% pigs/yr per litter

more

+7 +33% Kgs of lean meat

more

-7 Kgs -33% of feed

1962

2009

-50% Less manure

less

ABS’s track record in innovation

Gene Editing

RWD®

HCR

Genomic Testing in AU GMS

Infocus

Sexcel

The ABS Genetic Philosophy • Creating more from less, sustainably to feed the world – Production efficiency – Robust, trouble free cows – Improved health & fertility traits – Disease resistance – Never Stop Improving

ABS Beef Conference Albury March 2018

ABS HCR Initiative With Fletch Kelly, Beef Key Account Manager Southern Australia Region

What’s Important to a Beef Farmer’s Breeding Program?

Dairy vs. Beef........Are they that different?

What About Beef?

• Australian Beef producers are among the most progressive, technology focussed farmers in the world  Global demand for Australian beef bulls  Globally renowned for producing high quality meat, and one of the top 4 global meat exporters  Closely monitored and supported by industry bodies such as MLA, Breed Societies

• Still fail to scientifically address one of the most fundamental issues that can ruin profitability in both seedstock AND commercial herds • Poor pregnancy rate in breeding programs – Heat Detect (HD), Fixed Time AI (FTAI) or Embryo Transfer (ET)

Conception Rates & Semen Fertility

Semen Fertility – What We Know Semen Fertility – What We Think We Know • Semen is collected, and if it meets certain QC thresholds, it’s fine to use in all forms of AI and ET programs • Once semen is approved for AI, it will automatically result in a conception rate consistent with other bulls used in a program • Semen that shows a high total motility (TM) score and sound overall rating will perform well in any type of program

• If semen performs well in a HD or ET program, it should perform well in a FTAI program as well

Conception Rates & Semen Fertility • Nutrition  Condition  AI tech  Vaccinations  Environment 

• Semen lab report     • But why can we still get an average result?

Perhaps the greatest challenge in male reproductive physiology today is a recognition of the limitations in accuracy and precision of laboratory sire fertility estimates – Mel DeJarnette

Conception Rates & Semen Fertility • Semen Fertility Estimates are limited to two primary functions:  Serve as a barometer to estimate the adequacy of the semen quality control program  Serve as the basis for predictions of the fertility potential of a given sire if used in the imminent future

• Key word – ‘estimate’ • Is there anything we can learn from the dairy industry in regards to sire fertility?

• Can we make this ‘estimate’ more accurate for beef sires?

ABS HCR Initiative • Humble beginnings in February 2017 - simply started collecting conception rate data from a number of key clients through PTIC reports • Became intrigued by how our bulls performed in FTAI programs Then HD, ET data began to flow in.... We became confused!

ABS HCR – What Did We Find?

• Initial Findings  Some bulls very well suited to FTAI programs, and some not so well  Likewise for use in HD, TAI and ET programs  Range of ~42-81% for individual average sire conception rate (ACR) in FTAI programs

While some bulls performed well in all programs, it became evident that for some bulls, an inverse relationship can be seen between FTAI Performance and ET, HD programs

ABS HCR – What Did We Find?

84.00%

90.00% 80.00% 68.00%

70.00% 60.00% 50.00%

42.70%

40.00% 30.00% 20.00%

10.00% 0.00% Fixed Time AI

Heat Detect

Embryo Transfer

Figure 1: Variations in conception rate seen in Sire “X” for Fixed Time AI, Heat Detection and Embryo Transfer Programs respectfully.

ABS HCR – What Did We Find?

90.00%

81.00%

80.00%

70.00% 60.00% 52.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Fixed Time AI

Embryo Transfer

Figure 2: Variations in conception rate seen in Sire “Y” for Fixed Time AI and Embryo Transfer Programs respectfully.

ABS HCR – What Did We Find?

• Collected and analysed ~8000 individual pregnancy test results from around Australia over 3 years of joinings (2015-2017)  Data on all catalogued ABS domestic and US Angus Sires  Data on sires sold privately by studs

 Data on sires from most other companies

ABS HCR – What Did We Find?

• Three key findings from post-thaw microscopic and PT data analysis:  Semen with a high total motility score will likely be effective in HD and ET programs but may not be as effective in FTAI programs  Semen with an average motility score seems to perform well in FTAI programs, and not so well in some ET and HD programs

 Semen test reports are great for demonstrating whether semen is adequate in terms of QC (motility, concentration, defects), however is limited in its ability to predict performance in a reproductive program

Why Do We See This?

Potential Explanations • Energy supplied to sperm within the extension mixture is finite • Therefore, semen with a higher active total motility (TM) may metabolise this energy source at a faster rate, or effectively “burn out” prior to fertilisation • Fine for Heat Detect and Embryo Transfer – egg is ready 

• But for FTAI, ovulation may be delayed for several hours post AI • Therefore semen with a lower TM rating may in fact “last the journey”

The App! The first of its kind- Domestically and Globally

Your HCR Report

HCR – Into The Future • A number of advancements in the pipeline

 Regional reports – focussing on FTAI results in your specific region highlighting climate & drought  Comprehensive ET reports  Multi breed availability - Hereford, Wagyu, Simmental, Shorthorn, Charolais HCR reports available

• By 2020, goal to have over 100,000 PT results from ABS, private stud and other company AI sires • Expand HCR program through our ABS Global business, with HCR data to monitor sire performance across multiple regions

HCR – FTAI Class Toppers

Summary • Sire fertility is a key requisite for dairy farmers, so why not for beef as well?

• Shouldn’t we be striving for better breeding program outcomes?

• Some sires are well suited to FTAI, others more so for HD and ET programs • The HCR app is good for ABS, but it’s even better for you- the producer    

Knowledge is power, and knowledge drives profit Access to PT reports at your fingertips Monitor your reproductive performance year in, year out Make educated decisions around what bulls will work well in your breeding program from empirical data

Thank You

Incorporation of Reproductive Technologies to Enhance Efficiency of Cattle Operations Dr. G. Cliff Lamb Professor and Head Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University

Background

Impacts of Reproduction to the Poultry Industry YEAR

1957 Day 43

2010

Day 57

Day 71

Day 85

(Miles et al., 2011)

Impacts of Reproduction to the Dairy Industry 180% decrease

375% increase

(Capper et al., 2009)

WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT REPRODUCTIVE BENCHMARK IN A BEEF OPERATION?

The % of cows calving early in the calving season!

Understanding embryonic loss/survival

Time course of early bovine embryo development Event

Day

Estrus

0

Ovulation and fertilization

1

First cell division

2

8-cell stage

3

Migration to uterus

5-6

Blastocyst

7-8

Hatching

9-11

Maternal recognition of pregnancy

15-17

Attachment to the uterus

19

Placentation

25

Definitive attachment of the embryo to the uterus

42

Birth

285

% Pregnant

95-100

75-80

70-80

65-75

55-70

Data adapted from (Shea, 1981; Flechon and Renard, 1978; Peters, 1996; Telford et al., 1990)

Factor Affecting Embryonic/Fetal Mortality • Genetic factors • Heat Stress • Asynchrony between the embryo and maternal environment

Factor Affecting Embryonic/Fetal Mortality • Genetic factors • Heat Stress • Asynchrony between the embryo and maternal environment • Effect of the sire • Nutrition • Temperament/handling stress

Acclimation of Heifers 100

P < 0.01

% of pubertal heifers

Acclimated

Control

80

**

60

**

**

40 20 0 August

Cooke et al. (2009)

September

October

December

Acclimation of Heifers â&#x20AC;˘ Pregnancy during the breeding season % of pregnant heifers

100

Acclimated

Control

P < 0.01

80

60

**

**

40

** 20

0 1 Cooke et al. (2009)

2

3 4 5 6 7 Week of the breeding season

8

9

Acclimation of Heifers 70

Acclimated

**

Control

60

Pubertal, %

50

**

Treatment x Month P = 0.02 ** P < 0.01

40

**

30 20 10

0

October

November

December

January

February

Month of the study Cappellozza et al. (2012)

March

April

Factor Affecting Embryonic/Fetal Mortality • Genetic factors • Heat Stress • Asynchrony between the embryo and maternal environment • Effect of the sire • Nutrition • Temperament/handling stress • Shipping stress

Fertility of a Single Service 100

95

Early Embryonic Loss

Percentage, %

80

70

Late Embryonic/Early Fetal Loss 62

60

60

~ 25% Loss

~ 8% Loss

40 20

0

Fertilization

Meta Analysis: Reese et al., Submitted

Pregnancy D 28-32

Pregnancy D 60-100

Calving

Bovine Pregnancy Associated Glycoproteins (PAGs) • Pregnancy associated glycoproteins – Placental proteins belonging to Aspartic Proteinase family – 1st discovered during attempts to develop an early pregnancy test in cattle – Can be used to monitor embryo/fetus and placental function • Pohler et al., (2013), (2016a), (2016b)

– Biological roles of PAG remain unknown – Secreted by binucleated trophoblast cells into maternal circulation

Scoring the Patches: Estrus before TAI • Patch scores from 0-4 – 0 Lost patch – 1 < 25% – 2 25-50% – 3 50-75% – 4 >75%

Pohler et al., 2016

Estrus and Pregnancy Pregnancy rates 0.8 a

0.7

a

0.6

b

0.5 0.4

c

0.3 0.2 0.1 0

score Path 1Estrotect Path 2 patch Path 3 Path 4

Pohler et al., 2016

Pregnancy Loss 14%

Pregnancy Loss

12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%

1+2

3+4 Pohler et al., 2016

Breed of Sire Pregnancy Rate at day 30 (%)

Nelore x Nelore

65.53Âą3.23a

Nelore x Angus

50.95Âą1.57b

Franco et al.,

Breed of Sire Pregnancy Rate at day 30 (%)

Late Embryonic Mortality Rate (%)

Nelore x Nelore

65.53±3.23a

10.39±1.93a

Nelore x Angus

50.95±1.57b

4.94±1.07b

Franco et al.,

Enhancing production efficiency by focusing on fertility

Pregnancy Rate by Herds 80

Pregnancy rate, %

70 60

65.8

62.1 56.9

50.4

50

45.2

48.5 45.2

44.4

40 30 20

10 0 1

2

3

4

5 Herd

6

7

8

UF-NFREC Case Study

Changes in Income from Cattle Sales Total income from cattle $400,000

Income, $

$300,000

$200,000

$100,000

$0

2016 YTD $52,809 $107,253 $92,765 $183,803 $158,776 $202,820 $185,233 $217,717 $306,115 $366,014 2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Year

2013

2014

2015

Pregnancy has 4 times greater economic impact than any other production trait!

Influence of Calving Period on Reproductive Longevity

(Cushman et al., 2012)

Influence of Calving Period on Weaning Weights

(Cushman et al., 2012)

Estrus Synchronization and AI in Beef Cows

Cidirol

Estrus Synchronization and TAI in Beef Heifers

Cidirol

Does estrus synchronization have a negative impact on subsequent expression on estrus? n=275

60

57 90% Overall pregnancy rate

50

Percent

40 30

??

20

n=37

10

8

n=85

18

n=34

7

0 TAI

First 21 d 21-42 d Calving group

42-63 d

Estrus response of cows following the 7-day CO-Synch+CIDR protocol

40.0

37.5

97.5% return to estrus rate!!

35.0

Percent

30.0

Average Interval to estrus = 20.9 days

25.0 20.0

20.0 15.0

10.0

10.0

5.0

7.5

7.5

5.0

5.0

2.5

2.5

0.0 17

18

19

20 21 22 Days after GnRH

23

24

25

2006

UF-NFREC Case Study Remove bulls

Start breeding season

120

1

2007 Start breeding season

Remove bulls

120

2008 AI heifers

AI cows

AI late calving cows

1

8

49

AI late, late calving cows

70

Remove bulls

110

UF-NFREC Case Study 2009 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

AI late calving cows

49

AI late, late calving cows

Remove bulls

65

88

2010 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

AI late calving cows

49

Remove bulls

80

2011 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

AI late calving cows

49

Remove bulls

75

UF-NFREC Case Study 2012 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

Remove bulls

70

2013 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

Remove bulls

72

UF-NFREC Case Study Change in calf value: Year

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Mean calving day

79.2

80.9

59.2

56.2

53.7

47.2

39.5

38.7

Difference from 2006/2007

0

0

21.7

24.7

27.2

33.7

41.4

42.2

Per calf increase in value

0

0

$87

$99

$109

$135

$166

$169

Per calf increase in kg

0

0

19.8

22.5

24.8

30.7

37.7

38.4

Herd increase in value

0

0

$19,100

$29,700

$32,700

$40,500

$49,800

$50,700

UF-NFREC Case Study

120

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Percentage

100 80 60 40 20 0 1

11

21

31

41

51

61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 Calving day

Incorporation of Reproductive Technologies to Enhance Efficiency of Cattle Operations Dr. G. Cliff Lamb Professor and Head Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University

Understanding the effects of injectable mineral nutrition on reproduction

Mineral Deficiencies: Primary vs Secondary • Primary Deficiency – Deficient mineral intake – Rare in improved agricultural practices

• Secondary Deficiency – Adequate mineral intake, but deficient status due to the antagonistic influence of another compound – Most common type of mineral deficiency

Applications for injectable trace minerals in a commercial cow/calf production system • Contains 60, 10, 5, and 15 mg/mL of Zn, Mn, Se, and Cu, respectively.

• Results in a rapid increase in trace mineral status.

• Excreted rapidly.

• Less injection site reactions with the EDTAbased formulations.

Pregnancy attainment, %

Impact of ITM on pregnancy success in beef cows 100 95 90 85 80 75 1

2

3

Body Condition Score Category

Pregnancy attainment, %

Impact of ITM on pregnancy success in beef cows 100

MultiMin Saline

95 90 85 80 75

1

2

3

Body Condition Score Catagory

MultiMin advantage, %

Impact of ITM on pregnancy success in beef cows 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5

1 2 3 Body Condition Score Category

Altering gestational nutrition to enhance cattle performance

Differences During Early Embryo Development

Reciprocal Embryo Transfer Approach Angus

Brangus

Angus

Brangus

Reciprocal Embryo Transfer Approach Brangus

Angus

Angus

Brangus

Brangus

Angus

Feeding Scheme Angus Angus

Brangus

Brangus

Angus Angus

Brangus Restricted

Restricted

Brangus

Maintenance

Restricted

Maintenance

Restricted

Maintenance

Maintenance

Experiment Design - Recipients

GnRH

GnRH PGF2α GnRH

Embryo Transfer

ISGs

d0

d7

d18 d21

Plasma PSBP + Embryo Measurements Weekly

CIDR d-20

d-9

d-2

d28

Period of superimposed feeding scheme

d91

Embryo Morphometries

Crown to nose length

Crown to rump length

Recipient Body Condition Score 70

Body condition score

6

*

5.5

100

*

*

77

84

5

*

4.5 4 * Diet Ã&#x2014; Day, P = 0054

3.5 3 28

35

42

49

56

63

Day of gestation

70

91

Effects of Recipient Breed on Early Embryo Loss 90

a

70

Embryo loss, %

80

100 ab

70 60 50

b

b

40 30 20 10

0 Angus

Brangus

Recipient Breed

Figure 1. Effect of recipient breed and diet on early embryonic loss (Breed Ă&#x2014; Diet interaction, uncommon superscripts differ, P < 0.05).

Effects of Embryo Breed on Early Embryo Loss 100 70

Embryo loss, %

90 80

100

a

70 60

ab

ab b

50 40 30 20 10 0 Angus

Brangus Embryo breed

Figure 2. Effect of embryo breed and diet on early embryonic loss (Breed Ă&#x2014; Diet interaction, uncommon superscripts differ, P < 0.05).

Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item CON Cobalt, ppm Cotyledon 0.13a 0.09a Calf liver Copper, ppm Cotyledon 3.88a 362a Calf liver Manganese, ppm Cotyledon 22.0 5.82 Calf liver Zinc, ppm 65 Cotyledon 456a Calf liver

INR

ORG

P=

0.20b 0.12b

0.24b 0.13b

0.02 < 0.01

4.75ab 428ab

5.11b 450b

0.10 0.18

18.2 5.22

22.9 5.83

0.73 0.43

66 562ab

68 660b

0.87 0.01

Item Item Calving results Maternal diet (DM) Birth BW TDN, % results Weaning Weaning BW, kg CP, % Feedyard Co, ppm BRD symptoms, % Cu, ppm ADG, kg/d Mn, ppm Carcass HCW, kg Zn, ppm

CON CON

INR ORG Required P= INR ORG

42.1

Sulf Av-4 41.6 40.8

61

61

61

a ab 212 236b 14.4 223 14.4 14.4

1.03 2.18 42.3a 59.1a 10.3 20.8 1.69 1.71 55.9 74.0

0.63 53 0.04 7.8

2.14 0.10 b 20.0 0.02 20.6 10 1.74 0.66 74.3 40

a ab 409 418 428b 30.6 63.9 63.7

0.10 30

Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item CON Cobalt, ppm Cotyledon 0.13a 0.09a Calf liver Copper, ppm Cotyledon 3.88a 362a Calf liver Manganese, ppm Cotyledon 22.0 5.82 Calf liver Zinc, ppm 65 Cotyledon 456a Calf liver

INR

ORG

P=

0.20b 0.12b

0.24b 0.13b

0.02 < 0.01

4.75ab 428ab

5.11b 450b

0.10 0.18

18.2 5.22

22.9 5.83

0.73 0.43

Item Calving results Birth BW

CON

INR

ORG

P=

42.1

41.6

40.8

0.63

212a

223ab

236b

0.04

Weaning results Weaning BW, kg Feedyard

BRD symptoms, %

42.3a 59.1a

20.0b 0.02

ADG, kg/d

1.69

1.71

1.74

0.66

409a

418ab

428b

0.10

Carcass 66 562ab

68 660b

0.87 0.01

HCW, kg

Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item

CON

PUFA

SEM

P=

18:2 n-6

19.5

38.7

3.1

< 0.01

18:3 n-3

2.01

3.73

0.59

< 0.01

20:4 n-6

0.55

2.08

0.19

< 0.01

22:5 n-3

0.10

0.44

0.06

< 0.01

22:6 n-3

0.00

0.57

0.05

< 0.01

PUFA

22.6

44.9

4.0

< 0.01

Total ω-3

2.25

4.80

0.65

< 0.01

Total ω-6

20.4

41.1

3.4

< 0.01

Item Calving results Maternal diet (DM) Birth BW TDN, % results Weaning

CON SEM Required P= CON PUFAPUFA Palm oil SB + Fish 40.9 41.7 0.6 61 61

0.42 53

Weaning BW, kg CP, % Feedyard ADG, kg/d Fatty acids, Growing lot% Finishing(18:2 lot n-6), % Linoleic Carcass EPA (20:5 n-3), % HCW, kg DHA (22:6 n-3), % Marbling

241 10.2 242 10.2 3

0.82 7.8

3.52 1.22 3.490.03 1.12 1.87 0.44 1.98 0.690.04

???

0.05 0.06 ???

0.00 0.13 391 407 6 0.00 539 0.11 16 489

???

0.05 ???

0.01

Beef Cattle Production Cow-calf segment: Gestational nutrition • Last trimester of gestation – Availability of cows for feeding/replication – Specific nutrients associated with fetal development • Practical strategies for beef producers Item

CON

PUFA

SEM

P=

18:2 n-6

19.5

38.7

3.1

< 0.01

18:3 n-3

2.01

3.73

0.59

< 0.01

20:4 n-6

0.55

2.08

0.19

< 0.01

22:5 n-3

0.10

0.44

0.06

< 0.01

22:6 n-3

0.00

0.57

0.05

< 0.01

PUFA

22.6

44.9

4.0

< 0.01

Total ω-3

2.25

4.80

0.65

< 0.01

Total ω-6

20.4

41.1

3.4

< 0.01

Item Calving results

CON

PUFA

SEM

P=

40.9

41.7

0.6

0.42

241

242

3

0.82

1.12 1.87

1.22 1.98

0.03 0.04

0.05 0.06

HCW, kg

391

407

6

0.05

Marbling

489

539

16

0.01

Birth BW Weaning results Weaning BW, kg Feedyard ADG, kg/d Growing lot Finishing lot Carcass

BCS 3

BCS 5

BCS 7

Impact of Change in BCS on Reproduction in Heifers Restriction

Re-feeding

(FAT)

??

BCS 7

Resumption of estrous cycles

BCS 5 (MODERATE)

Termination of estrous cycles

Impact of Change in BCS on Reproduction in Heifers Treatments Item

MODERATE

FAT

Initial BW, kg

425a

515b

Initial BCS

5.0a

7.1b

BW at anestrus, kg

354

380

BCS at anestrus

3.1

3.3

Days to anestrus

66.5a

155.9b

Impact of Change in BCS on Reproduction in Heifers Treatments Item

MODERATE

FAT

BW at anestrus, kg

354

380

BCS at anestrus

3.1

3.3

BW at 1st estrous cycle, kg

455a

513b

BCS at 1st estrous cycle

5.2a

6.0b

Days to 1st estrous cycle

67.7

78.9

Advanced Reproductive Management Developments

Opportunities for Stem Cell Technology

(Honaramooz et al., 2013)

Opportunities for Stem Cell Technology

(Honaramooz et al., 2013)

Opportunities for Stem Cell Technology ď&#x201A;§

Use stem cells from genetically superior bull transplanted into testis of less desirable bulls

ď&#x201A;§

Use stem cells from bulls in bulls that are adapted to tolerate tough climatic conditions (i.e., heat stress)

Opportunities for Transgenic Technology Transmission of sex from males carrying Tcr transgene Trt

No. of sires

Males

Females

Total

% male

Tcr

7

217

114

331

65.5

No Tcr

5

231

240

471

49 (Herrman et al., 1999)

Final thoughts

Calving Distribution After Exposure to Bull Planned 1st day of calving season 10

% calving

64 days postpartum at start of next breeding season!

43% of cows < 50 DPP at start of the next breeding season

5 44%

0 1

11

21

31 41 51 Calving season day

61

71

Calving Distribution After Exposure to AI and ES

% calving

Planned 1st day of calving season 10 79 days postpartum at start of next breeding season!

7% of cows < 50 DPP at start of the next breeding season

5 88%

0 1

11

21

31 41 51 Calving season day

61

71

https://animalscience.tamu.edu/ibca/

International Beef Academy • Program Curriculum – 9 cores online courses / 6 required for certificate – 30 h / course in 6 weeks – 12-month cycles – September to August - Global Beef Production | Sept/Oct

- Breeding and Genetics | Mar/Apr

- Cattle Welfare/Behavior | Oct/Nov

- Immunology and health | Apr/May

- Forage Management | Nov/Dec

- Safety of Beef products | May/June

- Nutritional Management | Jan/Feb

- Beef quality | June/July

- Cattle Reproduction | Feb/Mar

- Residency/Graduation | Aug

Acknowledgements People Dr. John Arthington Dr. Reinaldo Cooke Dr. Carl Dahlen Dr. Alfredo DiCostanzo Dr. Travis Maddock Dr. Jeff Stevenson Mrs. Tera Black Ms. Luara Canal Mr. Jim Cassady Ms. F. Ciriaco Mr. Pedro Fontes Mr. Darren Henry Dr. Guilherme Marquezini Dr. Vitor Mercadante Ms. Nicky Oosthuizen Mrs. Carla Sanford Ms. T. Schulmeister Mrs. Kalyn Waters Graduate students Technical staff Support staff Collaborators Co-authors Beef cattle producers

Funding and Product Support ABS Global, Inc. Blandin Foundation Intervet Animal Health IVX/Teva Animal Health

Merial Animal Health MN-AURI NAAB Pfizer Animal Health Select Sires, Inc.

Univ. of FL Univ. of MN OR State Univ.

USDA-AFRI USDA-CSREES

USDA-TSTAR

Thank you!

Cliff Lamb, Professor and Head Department of Animal Science College of Agriculture and Life Science 2471 TAMU | College Station, TX 77843-2471 Tel: (850) 557-0168 Email: gclamb@tamu.edu

My Expectations for EVERY Female in the Herd • • • •

Must calve by 24 months of age Cow must have a calf every 365 days Cow must calve without assistance Cow must provide sufficient resources for the calf to reach it’s genetic potential • Calf must be genetically capable to perform • Cow must maintain their body condition score for my conditions • Must not be crazy (disposition)

Influence of Calving Period on Reproductive Longevity

(Cushman et al., 2012)

Influence of Calving Period on Weaning Weights

(Cushman et al., 2012)

Can we increase the percentage of heifers becoming pregnant early in the breeding season?

Effect of timing of gain on attainment of puberty and reproductive performance

Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance ADG, kg/d d0-112

Body weight, kg

350

EVENGAIN - 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.11 EVENGAIN

ADG, kg/d d112-168 EVENGAIN – 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.91

EVENGAIN

300

LATEGAIN LATEGAIN

ADG, lbs/d d0-168 EVENGAIN – 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.45

250 d0

d 112 Feeding Period

d 168 (Lynch et al., 1997)

Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Year 1

ADG, kg/d d0-112

Body weight, kg

400

EVENGAIN - 0.45 LATEGAIN – 0.26 EVENGAIN

350

ADG, kg/d d112-168 EVENGAIN – 0.80 LATEGAIN – 0.95

EVENGAIN

300

LATEGAIN LATEGAIN

ADG, lbs/d d0-168 EVENGAIN – 0.57 LATEGAIN – 0.49

250 d0

d 112 Feeding Period

d 168 (Lynch et al., 1997)

Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Year 2

ADG, kg/d d0-112

Body weight, kg

350

EVENGAIN - 0.39 LATEGAIN – 0.05 EVENGAIN

300

ADG, kg/d d112-168

EVENGAIN LATEGAIN

250

LATEGAIN

EVENGAIN – 0.74 LATEGAIN – 1.30 ADG, lbs/d d0-168 EVENGAIN – 0.53 LATEGAIN – 0.50

200 d0

d 112 Feeding Period

d 168

(Lynch et al., 1997)

Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Item

EVENGAIN

LATEGAIN

Age at puberty, d Year 1 Year 2

388 386a

384 407b

Weight at puberty, kg Year 1 Year 2

330 314

315 314

ab Means

within row differ (P < 0.01) (Lynch et al., 1997)

Effect of Timing of Gain on Reproductive Performance Item

EVENGAIN

LATEGAIN

First service PR, % Year 1 Year 2

55.3 56.4

55.5 71.1

Overall PR, % Year 1 Year 2

87.2 87.5

86.8 87.5 (Lynch et al., 1997)

Estrous cyclicity responses of heifers of distinct body conditions to energy restriction and repletion

We know how to synchronize cattle!

Impact of Fixed-Time AI on Calving and Weaning

Control

Natural mating

TAI + GnRH GnRH

TAI

PGF CIDR

Natural mating

(Rodgers et al., 2011)

Impact of Fixed-Time AI on Calving and Weaning Treatment Item

Control

TAI

No. of cows

615

582

Weaning rate, %

78

84

Weaning weight, lb ab Means

within row differ (P < 0.01)

176 ± 4a

17 kg

193 ± 4b (Rodgers et al., 2011)

UF-NFREC Case Study 2009 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

AI late calving cows

49

AI late, late calving cows

Remove bulls

65

88

2010 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

AI late calving cows

49

Remove bulls

80

2011 AI heifers

1

AI cows

8

AI late calving cows

49

Remove bulls

75

UF-NFREC Case Study

120

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Percentage

100 80 60 40 20 0 1

11

21

31

41

51

61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 Calving day

UF-NFREC Case Study Breeding season pregnancy rates: Year

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

PR

81%

86%

84%

86%

82%

94%

92%

93%

Mean calving day

79.2

80.9

59.2

56.2

53.7

47.2

39.5

38.7

BS length

120

120

110

88

80

75

70

72

Distribution by Days Postpartum â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Herd 1 25 20 15

% 10 5 0 34

44

54

64

74 84 94 Days postpartum

104

114

124

Distribution by Days Postpartum â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Herd 5 25 20 15 % 10 5 0 34

44

54

64

74 84 94 Days postpartum

104

114

124

Changes in Income from Cattle Sales Total income from cattle $400,000

Income, $

$300,000

$200,000

$100,000

$0

2016 YTD $52,809 $107,253 $92,765 $183,803 $158,776 $202,820 $185,233 $217,717 $306,115 $366,014 2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Year

2013

2014

2015

What were the negative factors affecting the productivity of the operation?

• Long breeding season – Extra labor during the calving season – No uniformity in the calf crop – Decreased value of the calves at market

• Use of natural service sires – – – – –

No proven sires Increased dystocia Differing calf types among sires group Cost of maintaining and managing bulls Risk of bull becoming sterile

• Cow and calf management – Differing vaccination, weaning , and/or branding dates

Difference among bulls for TAI?

Scenario: In a herd where 20 cows are inseminated to Bull A and 20 cows inseminated to Bull B, the pregnancy rates are: Bull A = 55% Bull B = 45% Question: Do the pregnancy rates differ between Bull A and Bull B?

Odds of pregnancy

95% Confidence that pregnancy rates differ if mean pregnancy is 50% 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

82 72 64

60

Bull A 50

56

50

50

Bull B

50

50 44

54 50 46

53 50 47

40 36 28 18

10

20

50

100

300

500

1000

Difference among bulls for TAI?

Scenario: In a herd where 100 cows are inseminated to Bull A and 100 cows inseminated to Bull B, the pregnancy rates are: Bull A = 55% Bull B = 45% Question: Do the pregnancy rates differ between Bull A and Bull B?

Odds of pregnancy

95% Confidence that pregnancy rates differ if mean pregnancy is 50% 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

82 72 64

60

Bull A 50

50

50

56

50

Bull B

50 44

54 50 46

53 50 47

40 36 28 18

10

20

50

100

300

500

1000

Difference among bulls for TAI?

Scenario: In a herd where 500 cows are inseminated to Bull A and 500 cows inseminated to Bull B, the pregnancy rates are: Bull A = 55% Bull B = 45% Question: Do the pregnancy rates differ between Bull A and Bull B?

Odds of pregnancy

95% Confidence that pregnancy rates differ if mean pregnancy is 50% 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

82 72 64

60 56 50

50

50

50

50 44

40 36

Bull A 54 50 46

53 50 47

Bull B

28 18

10

20

50

100

300

500

1000

ABS Bulls

successes and whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new Bill Cornell, ABS AU Beef Product Manager ABS Seminar March 19 2018

NHIA SEMEN MARKET SURVEY 2017 RESULTS - BEEF Breed Angus Belgian Blue Brahman

ABS Market Share 51% 10% 1%

Brangus Charolais Hereford Limousin Murray Grey Senepol Shorthorn Simmental Wagyu Other - Bos Taurus Other - Indicus

45% 17% 38% 37% 10% 0% 62% 22% 30% 4% 1%

Total domestic sales Angus

Total Market 79%

Total Export Sales Angus

Total Market 73%

BREEDS Angus Hereford Shorthorn Wagyu

Domestic Use 37% 57% 79% 74%

ABS RESULTS

total market share

domestic Sales export sales

46% 88%

ANGUS SIRE LIST March 2018 PROG 2YRS

HERDS

TOTAL ANLY

DAU

SCANS

CARCASS

MATAURI REALITY

2073 1993 1672

131 261 190

2972 6456 4224

65 918 372

1048 3640 2186

0 52 5

4

GAR PROPHET

1448

81

2346

194

1063

28

5

AYRVALE BARTEL E7

1327

185

5416

1040

2826

17

6

SYDGEN BLACK PEARL

7

MILLAH MURRAH KINGDOM

8

V A R GENERATION 2100

9

PATHFINDER GENESIS

1189 1132 973 953

91 69 59 53

2287 1108 1203 1134

1 0 0 41

1146 421 332 393

0 0 0 9

753 696 648 608 590

50 41 71 75 156

735 986 1290 754 4546

0 29 62 0 574

269 433 698 252 2693

0 0 0 1 22

1

EF COMPLEMENT

2

TE MANIA EMPEROR

3

13 MILLAH MURRAH KLOONEY 14 ARDROSSAN HONOUR 18 V A R RESERVE 19 RB TOUR OF DUTY 20 RENNYLEA EDMUND

ABS has 7 of the top 9 and 12 of the top 20 sires

Sire Selection • Hard job, have to provide the full range of breeds that are profitable to sell.

• AN, KB, HH/HP, SM, CH, LM, SH, FP • As AN is 79% of market

– lots of variety needed – Temperament, structure, looks<>performance – Sustainable, suited to environment, maternal

• Hardest part is selecting bulls that one does not like to fit a market slot

ANGUS SIRE LIST March 2018 top 10% DOC (20) CE/BWT(3.3)

BWT (2.4)

400(97) 600 (123)

EMA(7.4)

FAT(1.4)

IMF(3.0)

EF COMPLEMENT

7

3.8

2.6

97/122

8.4

1.1

2.0

TE MANIA EMPEROR

3

1.8

5.1

95/127

4.5

1.4

3.3

MATAURI REALITY

3

6.6

1.1

79/98

3.7

5.4

3.1

SYDGEN BLACK PEARL

-5

4.9

3.1

87/122

7.8

0.6

1.9

MILLAH MURRAH KINGDOM

14

-10.2

8.7

96/135

8.7

-0.6

-0.3

V A R GENERATION 2100

35

-0.7

4.5

103/118

11.6

-0.9

1.3

PATHFINDER GENESIS

23

1.0

6.8

110/150

9.8

2.3

1.8

MILLAH MURRAH KLOONEY

4

3.4

5.8

87/117

6.2

0.9

2.0

ARDROSSAN HONOUR

-14

0.6

4.1

79/105

3.4

1.4

3.5

V A R RESERVE

28

3.6

2.6

84/110

7.6

-2.2

1.9

RB TOUR OF DUTY

-20

1.7

4.5

106/136

6.1

-4.0

0.2

RENNYLEA EDMUND

11

5.1

1.1

70/90

6.4

3.2

4.2

Top 10%

Bottom 10%

LD CAPITALIST 316

LD CAPITALIST 316

Clunie Range Legend L348

Legend L348 Leading first up domestic sales sire Extremely short Gestation (-10 days), Superb CE Direct. Growth in top 5-10% Very good scrotal Bull is one of quietest ever. Just magnificent, been placid as a calf and can always enjoys a scratch in the field. Clunie Range have one of the larger auctions selling 140 bulls at $11,500 ave. Bull as an individual captures large sales due to his combination of CE + growth with the huge volume and capacity, high docility and structure. Use on heifers and hard keeping cows.

BALDRIDGE COMMAND

G A R FAIL SAFE

V A R FOREMAN

Millah Murrah Loch Up

BYERGO TITUS 6340

Milwillah Marble Bar J53 AMF, NHF, CAF, DDF,MAF, OSF, DWF

Marble Bar Of all Red Angus bulls pre single step on the Angus Australian breedplan Marble Bar No. 1 Angus Breeding Index No. 2 Domestic Index No. 1 Heavy Grain Index No. 1 Heavy Grass Index No Red Angus matches Marble Bar for the combination of CE, Short GL, Growth, SS and Carcass Semen exported to South America, NZ and USA Marble Bar is a legend in the making. Usage is wide and varied; his performance data opens him to all segments of the Red Angus breed, Progeny are quiet and showing great phenotype

Making the FINAL CUT – Genotypic and Phenotypic Difference Maker Offers one of the most complete EPD packages the

FINAL CUT Sire: MGS:

29BN0034

CB FINAL CUT 924X CB HOMBRE 541T3

Trait

Brangus breed has seen in years with exceptional type and kind Ranks in the top 20% of the breed for seven traits including calving ease, maternal, weaning and yearling performance and red meat yield As an individual he was dominant in his stout contemporary group – 83 lb BW, 770 lb WW, 108 WWR, 1344 YW, 104 YWR, 15.23 REA, 107 REAR and .41 IMF, 101 IMFR Phenotypically FINAL CUT is as complete, attractive and sound an individual as you will find

EPD

CED +6.0

BW -0.3

WW +42

YW +83

MILK +9

CEM +4.6

ACC

.38

.51

.41

.33

.27

.28

TM +30

SC +1.1

REA +.57

%IMF +.01

FAT -.041

.42

.43

.34

.40

December-17

CHAROLAIS Trait leader for BWT, 200, 400, 600 Absolute curve bender 14 traits in top 10%

LIMOUSIN Top 10% in 15 traits Trait leader in 8 traits 265 anly progeny 81 herds Has the phenotype and docility

Poll Hereford 560 anly prog in 36 herds Trait leader in 5 traits 15 traits in top 10% Super calving Outstanding daughter reports

SHORTHORNS 332 anly prog in 16 herds 3 times triat leader 9 traits top 10% CE, CARCASS , SS

SIMMENTAL ,

ALL TIME

SIMMENTAL , NEW STANDARD

Number of Herds: 6 Progeny Analysed: 224 Scan Progeny: 179, Number of Dtrs: 42 Performance Data 2nd to none No.1 in NZ BLG Progeny test for weaning and yearling, Total of 55 sires from US, Aus, & NZ representing Simmental, Charolais, Angus, Hereford & Stabilizer Homo Polled Breed leading Calving ease Growth Carcass Weight Marbling Docility High Accuracy 224 Progeny

WAGYU Macquarie Prelude M0495

Prelude The hot selling Wagyu bull in AU The highest available Wagyu bull for Terminal Carcase Index  Bought as a 9 month bull for $100,000. Fortunately is health cleared for all countries. Tested free for all genetic conditions SCD AA (only 18% are AA) Best option on EBVS $ Index for creating terminal carcass.

ABS Beef Appreciation Luncheon At Deforest July 2006

To say Thank you For all attendees of the ABS Seminar 15% of the RRP of all ABS BEEF sires Offer expires on April 6th 3PM Exceptions not on offer LD Capitalist and Cowboy Up Subject to stock availability

FARMING YOUR ENVIRONMENT! MARK LUCAS PASTURE AGRONOMY SERVICE TUMUT

BACKGROUND • HAWKESBURY AG COLLEGE – Dip Sci (Ag) • SYDNEY UNIVERSITY – Dip Ed • JOINED then DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 1980 • INITIATED PASTURE AGRONOMY SERVICE 1992

GRAZING INDUSTRY Slow to adopt change Challenges: • Climate / costs • Return on investment (ROI) • Land values?

• Expansion • Skilled labour drain

OPTIMISM • Improved returns • Market intelligence – ECI 438c/kg – Aug 2018!

• Research/breeding basis of success – RLEM clover • New germplasm for new climate

heat tolerance persistency • Water use efficiency (WUE) - MEXICO

TETRAPLOID technology

TETRAPLOID technology

OPTIMISM CEREALS – Frost tolerance LONG TERM – summer dormant Mediterranean fescue/phalaris GRAZING CANOLA CL970 LUCERNE – add soil tolerance

1980 • High rainfall period –

1980 continued • Pastures comprised some phalaris, silver grass, Patterson's curse, capeweed • 80% work was weed control • SPRAYSEED/24D • Glyphosphate on horizon ($32-42/L) • Full cultivation • Direct drilling new technology • Advent of tetraploid ryegrass • Super sweet corn • Minor feed lotting sector

2018 • Better understanding pasture/ weed management • Soils – still complex

2018 continued: • Seasons – more erratic • Dire t drilli g the or • Feed lotti g or

– crops/pastures

2018 continued: • Land values – 8-10 fold increase • Pasture:  Best livestock managers equal profitability to cropping (2015-2018)  Market specification becoming more rigid.

Segments: • GRASSFED • WAYGU • BREEDS

AGRONOMY – COMPLEX MATRIX SOILS: • Poor understanding • Annual health check • Chemistry parameters – pH, phosphorus, sulphur, Molybdenum • Soil health/soil moisture balance – organic matter/carbon – micro/macro biology - Boring but paramount - FERTILIZER – biggest single cheque written

PASTURES • Assess enterprise requirements • New technology – persistency/insect resistance • Livestock/pasture interface observations • Research – Launch of product Agrian RADIATE (root growth regulator) Insert picture

Pastures continued • Analyse perennial/annual/other • Biggest break through – tetraploid ryegrass technology • WINTERSTAR/VORTEX /CONCORD II etc.

• Maximise cool season growth = $ $ • 5 year spring rest impose

WATER USE/SOIL MOISTURE – not rain • Climate change • Seasonal predictions – recurring cycles (36 yr) • Future winners → elevate soil OM% → Soil i ro iology o posts → Seaso al progra i g

WATER • Stock water quality • Drought management – backup options Government disinterest

ENTERPRISE INNOVATION • Age – work smarter than harder

ENTERPRISE INNOVATION • SEASONAL STOCKING RATE REVIEW • SOIL SURFACE TRASH/MOISTURE management • INTENSIFICATION – Centre of Innovation Nebraska State - USA

CHANGE E pe t it, do ’t resist it

• GLOBALISATION • CENTRE PLATE PROTEIN • GROWING MIDDLE CLASS – BEEF CONSUMPTION • LIVESTOCK EXPORTS

• ANIMAL PRODUCTION – de-intensification • TECHNOLOGY

CATTLE SNAPSHOT • • -

REILAND ANGUS est 1972 Currently running: 1500 cows (800 registered) 2500 ewes 200 bulls 700 AI or Embryo transfers STRONG NEW ZEALAND BASE/HAZELDEAN

BREEDING PHILOSOPHY • • • • • •

Produce what consumers want to buy Avoid extremes Favour elite cows cf bulls Ensure cattle suit/thrive in environment A oid siss o s SELECTION – cull outliers/temp/fertility No structural soundness compromise • Bull selection – personalised identity for herd

FUTURE A farmers footsteps /observation will rival future technology embrace

Common sense breeding research: 1) Know what drives science research – whole supply chain On farm – calving ease/birth/growth/fertility – 50% Backgrounder - growth Feed lotter - growth/marbling/fat 50% Processor – marbling/beef yield NO COMSUMER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT!!

Index – artificial selection tool (Cows + calves) → VERTICAL INTERGATION est

FUTURE continued 2) Acknowledge breeding antagonisms 3) Maintain genetic diversity â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 036/FD/Mytty

4) Avoid extremes â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Gestation length/calf survival 5) Your environment management overrides all the above.

What environment does Breedplan best predict for?

FUTURE continued 6) Pharo cattle company lowest 20% growth

FUTURE continued 7) WAYGU - Fast track marbling – Angus challenge - Sustainability → 0 da s o feed to - Human health - Welfare → o su er per eptio 8) AGRONOMY foresight – Svalbard Global Seed Vault in NORWAY – past seed genetics stored 1260 Australian breed wheats 956 Australian grass varieties Livestock gene security? – grass conversion

FUTURE continued 9) Enjoy what you do! â&#x20AC;&#x201C; At least 80% time.

Surrou d ourself ith positi e people Dr David Johnstone AGBU) Have a well earnt holiday/downtime (without guilt)