Summer 2014
Free copy
Milk
components:
the right way to deliver results!
Reports:
Chatfield Holsteins/
Bottom Dollar Cattle Company
Stahlville Farming Co. (Stahlville Colony)
Wheatland Farming Co. (Wheatland Colony)
Crikside Farm
@DairyLandmark
Lindsay Bridge, B.S.A.
Ruminant Business Manager
Landmark Feeds
A
profitable
approach!
Every day you are faced with important decisions that have
a direct impact on the profitability of your farm’s operations.
What your neighbor chooses to do is not always the best option
for your farm. Why? Because your needs are different, your
farm is different, your herd management is different. Which
approach is more profitable for your farm?
Maximizing income over feed cost!
Income over feed cost consists of two critical aspects:
1
All feed costs incurred
2
Production level obtained with this feed
To achieve effective results, we must try to reduce costs without
affecting our production levels; otherwise, nothing is to be gained.
The second way is to optimize our production levels—it is a wellknown fact that herds that produce more milk per cow generate
higher standard margins.
The challenge: optimizing results!
Far too often an economic approach is based on cost control
rather than on optimizing revenue.
We must measure return on investment before making
a decision; why not invest $1 dollar if in the end, it generates
$10, $15 or even $20?
In this edition of At a Glance
As you read through all three technical articles in this edition,
you will learn more about ways to optimize your milk, fat
and protein production. We hope these articles help to improve
your understanding of the interrelationships between these
components and help you to make the most profitable decisions
for your farm.
Talk to your Landmark Feeds Dairy Nutrition Advisor about how
to optimize your PROFITABILITY. In the end, you decide what
will enable you to achieve your goals, and we will do our best
to help you.
We also want to use this opportunity to invite you
to follow us on Twitter. Your Landmark Dairy Team is actively
sharing relevant information and news every day but
we also want to hear from you, let’s get connected.
@DairyLandmark
*Bank note image used with the permission of the Bank of Canada.
IN THIS ISSUE
Your comments
are always welcome!
22
Send them to Kim Kaminsky
By mail:
Box 27, Otterburne
(Manitoba) R0A 1G0
By e-mail: [email protected]
By fax:
204 433-7003
2 Editorial
Milk components:
Stahlville Farming Co.
16 (Stahlville Colony)
Wheatland Farming Co.
3 Why are they important?
18 (Wheatland Colony)
6 Understanding milk fat
20 Crikside Farm
9 Factors affecting milk protein
22 60th Anniversary ad
New representative:
OPTIVIA RumimaxTM Dry TMR Program
23 Dan Chapman
Chatfield Holsteins/
24 VIVALTO®
12 for Transition Dairy Heifer Calves
14 Bottom Dollar Cattle Company
Douglas F. Waterman, Ph.D.
Andrée Bourgeois, Agr.
Director of Technology Transfer
Nutreco Canada Agresearch
Ruminant Technical Services Manager
Shur-Gain, East Region
Milk
Why are they important?
components:
There are several reasons why milk components are important to the dairy, but the two key
reasons are their role as a predictor of herd health and their economic impact. In addition,
there are many factors that can influence milk component % such as stage of lactation,
breed (see Table 1), genetics within a given breed, and season (see Graphs 1 and 2).
Table 1. Average composition of milk.
Protein/
Lactose
Fat
(%)
Ratio
Protein
(%)
Fat
(%)
Ayrshire
3.3
4.0
0.83
4.6
Brown Swiss
3.5
4.1
0.85
4.8
Guernsey
3.6
4.7
0.77
4.8
Holstein
3.2
3.7
0.87
4.7
Jersey
3.8
4.9
0.78
4.7
USDA-DHI
Graph 1.
Graph 2.
Milk fat % in Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic and
Manitoba (Canada), and in New York State
(U.S.A.), in 2013.
Milk protein % in Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic
and Manitoba (Canada), and in New York State
(U.S.A.), in 2013.
3.4
4.2
Ontario
4
New York
State
3.9
3.8
Quebec
3.7
3.6
3.5
Ontario
3.3
3.2
New York
State
3.1
3
Quebec
2.9
2.8
Atlantic
Atlantic
All data standardized to Total Milk Protein
Source: Dairy Comp Data 2013, Nutreco Canada Inc.
December
October
November
August
September
July
May
June
April
March
January
December
October
November
August
September
July
June
May
April
March
February
Source: Dairy Comp Data 2013, Nutreco Canada Inc.
Manitoba
February
2.7
3.4
January
Milk Fat %
4.1
Total Milk Protein %
4.3
Manitoba
3
Herd health
In healthy herds, the milk fat % is generally higher than the milk
protein %. A general rule of thumb for the Holstein breed is that
milk fat % should be 0.4 points higher than total protein % and
0.6 points higher than true protein %. When the milk protein %
is equal to or higher than the milk fat %, this is called a “fat-protein
inversion” and is a good indicator that your cows are not healthy.
This is true unless you are deliberately feeding a fat-depressing diet.
In a normal situation, you would want less than 10% of the cows
in your herd to be inverted (protein % > fat %). If more than 10%
are inverted, your herd may be experiencing rumen acidosis,
laminitis, and/or an increased incidence of displaced abomasum.
Nutritionists use inversions in making ration recommendations,
such as increasing the physically effective fibre level in the diet,
changing the particle length of the forages to minimize sorting,
lowering mixing times, adding dry hay or straw, lowering the
amount of rumen active fat and/or the concentrate being fed.
Management (Table 2) can also play a valuable role in preventing
inversions by making sure cows have access to feed 22-24 hours
a day, limiting time away from feed to 3 hours per day (this
includes milking time, treatment time and exercise time), minimizing
the amount of slug feeding, harvesting forages at the proper
moisture and particle length, conducting forage dry matters
on a weekly basis, following the ration provided by the nutritionist,
and not over mixing any TMR which is being used.
Table 2. Summary of feeding management changes that alter milk solids production.
Management Factor
Milk Fat Percent
Milk Protein Percent
Maximum intake
Increased feeding frequency of grain
Underfeeding energy
High NFC1 (>45%)
Normal NFC (25-40%)
Excessively high fibre
Low fibre2 (<26% NDF)
Small particle length3
High crude protein
Low crude protein
Escape protein (33 to 40% of CP)
Added fat (>7 to 8%)
Increase
Increase 0.2-0.3 units
Little effect
Decrease by 1% or more
Increase
Marginal increase
Decrease by 1% or more
Decrease by 1% or more
No effect
No effect
No effect
Variable
Increase 0.2-0.3 units
Increase slightly
Decrease 0.1-0.4 units
Increase 0.1-0.2 units
Maintain normal level
Decrease 0.1-0.4 units
Increase 0.2-0.3 units
Increase 0.2-0.3 units
Increase if previous diet was deficient
Decrease if diet is deficient
Increase if previous diet was deficient
Decrease by 0.1-0.2 units
1 NFC = nonfibre carbohydrates
2 Low dietary fibre, high nonfibre carbohydrates, small forage particle length and low forage levels all may increase milk protein percent and greatly reduce milk fat test.
These are not desirable ways to improve milk solids-not-fat. These feeding practices cause acidosis, lameness and feed intake fluctuations. The cow is not healthy.
3 Less than 15% of particles greater than 2 inches indicates inadequate particle length.
Source: 692-1077-A, Feeding to Maximize Milk Solids, Risk Grant, UNL.
Another health parameter to evaluate is in fresh cows. Fresh cows
with milk fat % greater than 5 may be an indication of excessive
body weight mobilization due to negative energy balance and
a higher risk of ketosis. It would be important to review dry matter
intakes (DMI) both pre- and post-calving to ensure DMI are
not too low. Pre-fresh diet it is important to be between 15
and 18 Mcal/d to support optimal intake and to minimize
the pre-calving decline in DMI.
Economics
The dollar amount received in the milk check is based on many
factors. The amount of total milk produced, kg/lb of fat, protein
and solids non-fat produced, the base price of milk, and the price
per kg/lb of fat, protein, and solids non-fat. The milk fat
and protein % are important because they, along with the kg/lb
of milk, determine the total fat and protein yield. The producer
gets paid for fat and protein yield, and not the %. See Table 3
as example:
4
Table 3.
Influence of milk protein % and milk yield
on protein yield.
Milk yield (kg)
Milk
protein
(%)
31.75
34.02
36.29
38.56
40.82
2.8
0.89
0.95
1.02
1.08
1.14
2.9
0.92
0.99
1.05
1.12
1.18
3
0.95
1.02
1.09
1.16
1.22
3.1
0.98
1.06
1.12
1.20
1.27
3.2
1.02
1.09
1.16
1.23
1.31
3.3
1.05
1.12
1.20
1.27
1.35
As you can see, the same milk protein yield of 1.05 kg can be
achieved by a herd with a 3.3% milk protein producing 31.75 kg
of milk as a herd producing 36.29 kg of milk with a 2.9% milk
protein. Yes, the goal would be to make the 36.29 kg or more
of milk with a 3.3% milk protein, but the main point is that yield
is the key and not percentage.
Table 4. Agri-Mark’s price forecast 12-12-13
Price per pound
of component (USD)
Table 5. Income per month based on a 50 kg
quota, lactose and other solids being fixed
at 5.7%, fixed ratio at 2.36.
Prot. %
3.71
3
28,165
3.2
2013 (actual)
Low
High
Average
Milk fat
$1.51
$1.82
$1.66
Milk protein
$2.82
$3.63
$3.30
Milk fat
$1.63
$1.76
$1.69
Milk protein
$3.20
$3.40
$3.29
Milk fat
test %
50 kg
quota
3.4
3.6
3.79
3.88
Diff.
3.96
0
28,589
424
28,958
793
29,348
1,183
Prices of components used: fat $9.5728/kg; protein $8.8209/kg and lactose and other solids
$1.7409; average for 2013.
2014 (forecast)
Based on Agri-Mark’s price forecast (Table 4), 2.31 pounds (1.05 kg)
of protein would be worth on average $7.623, so you can see
the financial benefit of making more protein. However, it is important to consider the cost of making this extra protein. It typically
costs significantly more to feed for higher protein yield compared
to milk fat yield. Milk fat % (2-5 points) is much more responsive
to dietary changes than milk protein % (0.6 points). In addition,
it is difficult to predict whether dietary changes will increase milk
protein % or higher milk production. However, either way, milk
protein yield improves.
This example shows that for the same amount of quota, there
is an advantage to producing more components. If you have
a protein test of 3.0%, the milk fat will need to be 3.71% to fall
within your 2.35 ratio. This will generate $28,165 net income (not
considering feed cost). If you have a protein test of 3.4%, you will
be able to produce milk with a fat test of 3.88% and still maintain
the maximum ratio of 2.35. This will generate $28,958, an additional
$793 per month.
Depending on the cost of making the extra protein and fat, you
can see the financial advantage of increasing your herd’s protein
and fat yield.
These examples are based on U.S.
numbers, but the same scenario
applies to the Canadian market.
However, the Canadian market has
also established a specific milk fat %
to milk protein % ratio that must be
maintained in order not to be penalized.
The ratio is the percent of protein plus
percent of total solids divided by the
percent fat, and the ratio maximum
is 2.36. In Table 5 there is an example
to demonstrate the impact of
producing more components
in a herd with 50 kg of quota.
5
Bill Woodley
Ruminant Technical Services Manager
Shur-Gain
MILK FAT IS
ONE OF THE KEY
COMPONENTS OF MILK
AND, IN MANY DAIRIES, IS ONE
OF THE MAIN ECONOMIC
DRIVERS.
The other components are protein, lactose, minerals and
vitamins. Milk fat production can vary dramatically both within
the dairy cow and the dairy herd; this is dependent on a wide
range of factors from nutrition to genetics. Many producers
can experience wide “swings” in milk fat production—swings
that they may not experience with the other components,
especially lactose. The difficulty in predicting milk fat percentages with diet changes and/or other management changes
makes it the most challenging component to manage.
HOW DOES A DAIRY COW MAKE MILK FAT?
Milk fat is made up of fatty acids which are defined by the number
of carbon (C) atoms in each molecule. The dairy cow has
the ability to both “build” milk fat from volatile fatty acids, such
as acetic acid, or to “draw” long-chain fatty acids pre-formed
from the diet and body fat via the blood. On average, half of the
fatty acids in milk fat are synthesized in the udder. Both preformed and synthesized are critical for the cow to make milk fat.
The short-chain fatty acids (< C14 in length) are entirely synthesized in the epithelial cells of the udder while approximately half
of the C16:0 (palmitic acid) is synthesized and half is extracted
from the blood. The long-chain fatty acids (> C:18) are exclusively
extracted from the blood.
BLOOD LIPIDS (PRE-FORMED FATTY ACIDS)
Pre-formed fatty acids are derived from either dietary sources
or body stores. The source of the medium- and long-chain fatty
acids will vary depending on the amount or severity of body
weight loss. Dietary fatty acids from vegetable oils are highly
unsaturated and are biohydrogenated (saturated) in the rumen
by the rumen microbes, resulting in a higher level of saturated
fat in the milk.
6
MILK FAT COMPOSITION
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE KEY FACTORS
THAT WILL AFFECT RUMEN PH?
g per 100 g fatty acids
30
Provide adequate effective fibre:
O This will encourage the development of a fibre mat
and encourage cud chewing.
25
20
Reduce sorting in TMR situations:
O Forages that are chopped too long or are unpalatable may
lead to sorting. This could lead to excessive grain intake as
many dairy cows preferentially sort for grain rather than fibre.
15
10
Encourage adequate cud chewing:
5
CLA
C18:3
C18:2
C18:1 trans
C18:1 cis
C18:0 (stearic)
C16:0 (palmitic)
C14:0 (myristic)
C12:0 (lauric)
C4:0 - C10:0
0
WHAT ARE THE MAIN FACTORS THAT AFFECT
MILK FAT PRODUCTION?
Rumen pH is the “tipping” point for VFA production in the rumen.
The rumen works best with a pH in the range of 5.8-6.2. The
cellulolytic (fibre-digesters) bacteria are “sensitive” to pH levels
lower than 5.8. When levels drop below this mark, the cellulolytic
(fibre-digesters) bacteria population will suffer. This will lead
to a shift to lower acetate production and higher propionate
and lactic acid production. A slight shift could lead to higher milk
production with lower % fat as the propionate drives lactose
production. A major shift would lead the cow to a subclinical
or clinical acidosis state. This would result in reduced acetate
production and reduced rumen function. The net result would be
a decrease in % milk fat and a decrease in milk fat production
(kg/cow/day).
O Cud chewing provides a number of key benefits to the cow
and two major effects on rumen fermentation, one of which is
to reduce the particle size of the ingested material to facilitate
the rumen “bugs” in the fermentation process. This improves
overall fibre digestibility. The other key benefit is the production
of saliva, which contains sodium bicarbonate, a significant
rumen buffer, and also provides lubrication in the esophagus.
BE AWARE OF CARBOHYDRATE
FERMENTABILITY
The physical properties of carbohydrates can influence the rate
of fermentability. Some of these factors are source (corn vs.
barley), moisture (HM corn vs. dry corn) and process (coarse vs.
fine). These dietary factors are multi-factorial and their impact
on milk fat production is difficult to predict in every situation.
A classic study illustrating these interactions was conducted
by Oba and Allen (Michigan State University). In this study (see
chart on the next page), the researchers fed either a high-starch
or a low-starch diet; they used either HM corn or dry corn to
achieve these starch levels.
At the low-starch level, the type of corn did not have a significant
impact on milk fat parameters (% and kg). But, in the high-starch
diet, the addition of HM corn significantly reduced milk fat yield
by 15%.
7
CAN MILK FAT PRODUCTION BE INCREASED
BY FEEDING PALMITIC ACID (C16:0)?
Effect of corn grain processing method
and starch intake on milk fat synthesis.
High starch
(32% DM)
Milk yield (kg)
Milk fat %
Milk fat yield
(kg)
Low starch
(21% DM)
HM
corn
Dry ground
corn
HM
corn
Dry ground
corn
38.8
38.4
33.4
34.3
3.05%
3.59%
3.95%
3.73%
1.17
1.35
1.33
1.27
Adapted from Oba and Allen (2003)
THE TRANS FATTY ACID THEORY
When a herd is experiencing a milk fat depression, either mild
or severe, an altered rumen fermentation is the mostly likely
cause. Whether it is a change in rumen pH or the addition of oils
or fats into the diet, the microbial biohydrogenation pathway has
shifted. The shift will favour an alternative pathway that could lead
to the excess production of trans-10, cis-12 CLA rather than
C18:0 (stearic acid). The production of stearic acid would be
considered the typical pathway. Research has shown that even
small amounts of the trans-10, cis-12 CLA fatty acid can have
a negative effect on milk fat synthesis. Some of the situations that
will favour this alteration of rumen fermentation would be:
O Feeding high levels of unsaturated fats (RUFAL). Rumen
unsaturated fatty acid load (RUFAL) (C18:1 + C18:2 + C18:3)
is primarily derived from vegetable oils in the diet. High levels
of oils will overwhelm the microbial biohydrogenation process
and may lead to the production of trans-10, cis-12 CLA.
O A disruption of a stable rumen pH (5.8-6.2) may negatively
affect the biohydrogenation process. This could lead to
the production of trans-10, cis-12 CLA.
Palmitic acid (C16:0) is unique in that it can be “built” within
the udder or “drawn” intact across the blood stream to the udder.
Feeding a fat source containing palmitic acid can provide
an essential component for high-producing herds that require
both high milk fat production (kg/day) and high % fat production
(kg/day).
Recent research by Ricco et al. (JDS, 2014) has shown that feeding
palmitic acid can have a positive effect on milk fat production.
The palmitic acid treatment increased milk fat concentration
(3.66 vs. 3.55%) and yield (1.68 vs. 1.59 kg/d) as compared
to feeding stearic acid (C18:0). The increase in this trial was
associated with a 24% increase in C16:0 output into milk.
In another study (JDS, 2007), researchers compared three levels
(500, 1,000 and 1,500 grams) of the palm fat product against the
control. The addition of the palmitic fatty acid product increased
milk yield and milk fat percentage, with no observed adverse
effects on dry matter intake.
Response of feed intake,
milk yield, and composition
to varying levels of fatty
acids of palm oil
Variable
0
500
Actual intake of fatty acid
of palm oil, grams
0
476
887
1,248
Milk Yield, kg/day
30.9
34.0
34.2
34.2
Fat %
3.44
3.93
4.06
3.88
Fat Yield, grams/day
1,018 1,304 1,320 1,411
DMI, kg/day
23.3
MAKING MILK FAT
8
Target daily intake
of fatty acid of palm oil
The dairy cow’s ability to make milk fat
is quite complex and can be affected
by a multitude of factors. Understanding
the interactions between nutrition and
physiological factors is the key to producing
optimum milk fat levels for your herd.
26.4
1,000 1,500
24.7
23.8
Dr. John Doelman
Ruminant Nutrition Research Scientist
Nutreco Canada Agresearch
Factors
affecting
milk protein
There are several factors that will influence the extent
of milk protein production in the lactating dairy cow.
These factors consist largely of the genetic potential
of the cows, how the cows are managed, and diet.
Understanding how each of these components
influences milk protein synthesis is critical to maximizing
efficiency and production.
9
Genetics of the cow
It is clear that there are breed differences with respect to milk and component yields. For example,
when fed similar rations, the Jersey and Holstein breeds produce milk of differing concentrations
of fat, protein and lactose. Typically, the Jersey will produce milk at about 3.8% crude protein compared to 3.2% in a Holstein (www.milk.org). A Jersey can produce 6,000 kg of milk over a lactation
to yield 228 kg of protein, whereas a Holstein can produce 9,000 kg of milk and 288 kg of protein
over a lactation. The average milk protein yield across an entire herd will mask the individual values
for each cow in the herd. The genetic merit of cows predisposes them to produce a certain amount
of milk protein per day and can be improved in the long term through selection for milk protein.
Management system
In order for cows to produce at optimal levels, it is important that they be housed in a safe,
comfortable and healthy environment. Adequate space to rest and move, a clean, dry bed,
and fresh air will ensure that cows are comfortable and able to achieve their production potential.
It is also important that they be given access to a high-quality, well-balanced ration. The composition
of forages and feed ingredients should be determined prior to ration formulation to ensure that
energy and amino acid requirements for milk production are met. The ration should be monitored
for quality and dry matter to ensure intake is maintained. Feed bunk management is also a key
component as feed should always be readily available in order to maximize feed intake.
Diet
O Energy supply
The type of energy supplied in the ration has a significant effect on lactation performance. While fat
has the highest energy density, it cannot be used by rumen microbes and potentially has a negative
impact on milk protein yield, which limits its inclusion in dairy rations. Dietary provision of a rumen
inert or bypass fat is an effective way to increase milk and milk component yield while avoiding the
negative effects of feeding unprotected fat. Carbohydrate represents the bulk of the energy component
in the ration and is present on a scale from undegradable, i.e., passing through the gastrointestinal
tract unaltered, to slowly and rapidly fermentable, which are broken down by rumen microbes.
Ruminal carbohydrate fermentation generates the volatile fatty acids propionate, acetate, butyrate
and lactate. Propionate is largely used for glucose synthesis in the liver, as the ruminant does not
absorb a great deal of dietary glucose and relies on endogenous glucose production to meet its
requirements. Glucose is the major precursor for lactose in the mammary gland. Acetate is used
as an energy source and is also a precursor for milk fat in the mammary gland. Butyrate is used by
cells in the rumen and gut epithelium as an energy source, which generates beta-hydroxybutyrate
that can be further used in the rest of the body for energy. Changes to the forage to concentrate
ratio in the diet have been shown to influence milk protein yield in dairy cattle. When fed either
a high-forage or high-concentrate diet, milk protein yields tend to be depressed, while a forage
to concentrate ratio closer to the median elicits a greater milk protein yield. Rations that are higher
in more rumen-fermentable carbohydrate, such as barley, can lead to an increase in milk protein
yield without any increase in dietary protein. This is partially through an increase in microbial
protein outflow from the rumen, but is also be due to improved energy status, which has been
shown to stimulate milk protein synthesis.
10
O Protein supply
The protein component of feed ingredients comprising the ration can be divided into three
fractions. Rumen-degradable protein is the portion of the ration that will be metabolized by rumen
microbes and converted into microbial protein in the rumen. Through the fermentation
of feedstuffs, rumen microbes make available carbohydrate and nitrogen (N) sources, which they
use as fuel for metabolic processes and growth. In particular, microbes will use or create amino
acid from available N and carbon (C) to synthesize microbial protein. Microbes then pass through
the gut with the consumed feed, are digested and absorbed, and their amino acids used for milk
protein synthesis. If there isn’t enough rapidly fermentable carbohydrates, or rumen-available
protein or nitrogen, the microbes will not digest fiber as efficiently and, consequently, dry matter
intake decreases, resulting in a lower microbial protein supply. On the other hand,
an over-supply of rumen-available protein will lead to excess rumen ammonia and inefficient
use of N. Rumen escape protein is slowly degraded and passes through the rumen mostly
unaffected by microbial action and can be digested and absorbed in the lower gut. Protein consists
of twenty different amino acids, the profile of which influences how milk protein is made
in the mammary gland.
O Essential amino acid supply
To support a given milk protein yield, a certain level of essential amino acids (EAA) is required.
The contribution of EAA from microbial and rumen bypass protein makes up the total EAA supply,
and the diet must provide these amounts to meet the requirement for milk protein synthesis.
The EAA profile of microbial protein is consistent, but the EAA provided in the bypass portion will
change with the diet, hence the importance of considering the profile of EAA provided by the
forages and feed ingredients in the ration. The supply of several EAA has been shown to influence
milk protein yield, for example methionine in typical North American rations. In this type of diet,
based largely on corn silage and soybean meal, methionine may be considered limiting to milk
protein production, because soybean meal is low in methionine, and the other ingredients do not
provide sufficient EAA to balance the requirements of the cow. In another ration scenario, taken
from Europe where cows are fed a grass-based diet, histidine may become limiting to milk protein,
rather than methionine, because grass contains very little histidine. Based on this knowledge,
it is imperative that forage and feed ingredient templates used in ration formulation contain accurate
values of rumen-available and bypass EAA to meet the requirements for milk protein production.
There are many factors that influence the extent of milk protein
yield in the lactating dairy cow. In summary, cow and feed bunk
management, as well as maximizing feed intake will provide
the nutrients necessary to meet milk protein requirements. Milk
protein yield can be further improved by balancing the amount
of rumen-available carbohydrate with sufficient rumenavailable protein to maximize microbial protein synthesis.
Energy density of the ration, through carbohydrate supply, will
improve the animal’s glucose status and facilitate synthesis.
Ensuring that bypass protein is adequate and amino acids are
balanced and provided in sufficient quantities will optimize
milk protein production.
11
Bill Woodley
Ruminant Technical
Services Manager
Shur-Gain
Rumi
for Transition
Many dairy producers struggle to know what to feed
to the recently weaned dairy calf (2-4 months of age)… dry
hay and heifer pellet, wet TMR with fermented forages, silage,
calf starter – the list goes on and on. Rumen development starts
in the pre-weaned phase as the milk-fed calf consumes calf
starter. The digestion of the calf starter and the subsequent
production of butyric acid is the key driver for the initiation
of rumen development. The rumen continues to grow
and develop in size (capacity) and function after the weaning
process. This is a critical process for the young ruminant
as the heifer needs to be able to digest forages as the main
nutrient source. Research has also demonstrated that these
young heifers at this stage (2-4 months) are extremely
efficient at turning nutrients into weight gain.
The Transition
Transition
Pre-ruminant
Milk
Ruminant
Solid Feed
Esophagus
To intestines
Rumen
25% Omasum
10%
Reticulum
5%
Reticulum
5%
Rumen
80%
Omasum
8%
Abomasum
60%
Abomasum
7%
As mentioned above, rumen development is influenced by the
production of volatile fatty acids (VFAs); primarily butyric acid.
Butyric acid is produced by the degradation of grain in the
developing rumen. This will lead to the growth of the rumen papillae
and improve feed efficiency as the VFAs are a key energy source
for growth. It is also known that feeding fine material such as
ground ingredients could lead to parakeratosis. This is a coating
on the outside wall of the rumen papillae that will interfere with
the absorption of the VFA; thus reducing feed efficiency. Feeding
an abrasive material such as chopped straw or dry hay will act
as a “scrub brush” for the rumen wall. This should lead to less
parakeratosis and improve feed efficiency through improved
absorption of VFAs.
12
max Dry TMR Program
Dairy Heifer Calves
TM
Rumen Papillae – Birth
2013 Summer Feeding Trials:
OPTIVIA 22% Rumimax Dry TMR Feeding Program
TM
1.60
1.50
1.40
Rumimax
Average
TM
1.30
ADG 1.20
kg/hd/day 1.10
Conventional
Average
1.00
0.90
Papillae During Weaning – No Forage
0.80
0.70
Recent on-farm research in Ontario has demonstrated that a careful balance of grain and forage NDF intake provides the best
opportunity for optimum growth. Excessive forage NDF intake
during this stage will limit both DMI and growth. OPTIVIA
RumimaxTM Dry TMR Program provides a consistent grain and
forage NDF intake during this critical phase. The results from the
on-farm study, across a wide variety of dairy operations in Ontario,
were remarkable. The ADG for the herds fed the OPTIVIA
RumimaxTM Dry TMR Program was 1.38 kg/calf/day during
this phase as compared to 1.00 kg/calf/day for conventionally fed
herds. This is a 38% improvement in ADG and would result
in a 22.8 kg weight advantage at 4 months of age.
TM
Rumimax Average
TM
Rumimax #6
TM
Rumimax #5
TM
Rumimax #4
TM
Rumimax #3
TM
Rumimax #2
TM
Rumimax #1
Conventional #2
Conventional #1
0.60
The primary driver for growth during the transition phase
(2-4 months) is the consumption of appropriate nutrients
to optimize growth (>0.9 kg/day). Feeding poor quality forages
ad lib, will not provide appropriate levels of fermentable carbohydrates while high quality forages may lead to inappropriate calf
ration intake. This program may lead to inconsistencies in growth
rates for the transition heifers.
OPTIVIA RumimaxTM Dry TMR Program offers many advantages
over traditional program such as more consistent intake of both
forages and grain, consistent source of abrasive fibre and
increased intake of calf ration to provide nutrients required for high
growth rates.
Rumimax Dry TMR Program
the ideal start for the rest of her life!
TM
13
Chatfield Holsteins
Bottom Dollar Cattle Company
Gordon, Thomas, Amy, Jaclyn and Andy
Farm
report
A passion
for dairy farming
Portrait of the farm
Chatfield Holsteins/
Bottom Dollar Cattle Company,
located in Arborg, MB,
is owned by Andy and Jaclyn
Platt. While Andy originally
grew up in Nova Scotia,
his father, Gordon, moved the
family to Manitoba in 1986,
where he purchased the current
farm (with 40 cows) as a going
concern. Andy began buying
into and expanding the farm
in 1996, and took over complete
ownership in 2009. Three
generations now work side
by side on the farm, which
features a sizeable dairy
and a small beef herd.
14
14
The Chatfield Holsteins/Bottom Dollar
Cattle Company herd consists of a total
of 300 Holsteins, including 120 cows in milk.
Production averages 32 kg of milk per cow,
and the BCA is 208-215-207. On their
2,230-acre property, the Platts grow alfalfa,
grass, corn silage, barley, oats and canola.
While the situation is beginning to improve
now, four years of flooding followed by
two years of very dry weather had a strong
negative impact on production and fertility,
forcing the Platts to buy heifers for the first
time in 20 years in 2011. However, they are
aiming for expansion, albeit slowly, and
always with the “better before bigger”
philosophy in mind.
A family affair
Andy and Jaclyn have two children, Amy, 8,
and Thomas, 6. While the kids are still a little
young to be working on the farm, they’ve
been a presence in the barn since they were
babies. Amy loves spending time with
the calves and Thomas is fascinated by
the machinery. In addition to doing as many
tasks as possible on the farm (electrical,
plumbing, welding, mechanics, etc.)
“We don’t know
of any other professions
where you can do
so many different jobs
and never get bored.”
A love affair
The Platts are passionate about what they do, raising cattle
and crops: “We can’t see ourselves doing anything else. We
don’t know of any other professions where you can do so many
different jobs and never get bored.” They cherish being able to
raise their children in the country and they believe in teaching
them the value of hard work—in fact, one of their kids once
quipped, “I feel sorry for the kids who
have nothing to do but watch TV”! One
downside, however, is the difficulty finding
help. They do not live in a strong dairy
area, so there is a shortage of experienced workers to call on. This means
Andy must do the milking himself most
evenings, making it hard for him to attend
the kids’ events.
Facing forward
The Platts remain optimistic about the
future. While they feel there will be many
challenges in the industry over the next
few years, they firmly believe that strict
quality standards and programs, such
as CQM and the code of conduct,
will help to maintain public support
for Canadian milk.
Chatfield Holsteins Bottom Dollar Cattle Company
and milking most evenings, Andy is the
president of the Arborg Agricultural
Society, organizing and running the local
fair and rodeo, as well as a director on
the Interlake Holstein Club and a DMC
member. He renovated the farm house
and the old barn himself and enjoys
spending time in his shop. Jaclyn works
as the librarian at Arborg High School;
when she’s not being a librarian, she’s
busy doing the bookkeeping for the farm
and working in the barn every day before
and after work, tending to the calves and
helping with the milking. The Platts are
assisted by Andy’s father, Gordon, 74,
who has bounced back admirably after
sustaining serious injuries in 2010 when
a cow fell over on him. The Platts also
employ milker Carol Wearing, a recent
immigrant from Scotland.
Praise for Landmark Feeds
The Platts are served by the Landmark Feeds mill in Otterburne,
MB, where their feed adviser is Corey Park. They have an
excellent working relationship with him; he’s knowledgeable
and easy to work with, and they always enjoy having him stop by
the farm. Overall, they are very satisfied with Landmark Feeds,
praising them for their dedication to the individual customer and
to the dairy industry as a whole.
Farm profile
Chatfield Holsteins/
Bottom Dollar Cattle Company,
Arborg, Manitoba
Owners: Andy and Jaclyn Platt
Number of head in the herd
Cows in milk
Average production
BCA
Types of crops
Size of property
300
120
32 kg
208-215-207
alfalfa, grass, corn silage, barley,
oats and canola
2,230 acres
Service center: Landmark Feeds Otterburne, MB
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Corey Park
“I have had the distinct pleasure of working
with the Platt family in several capacities over
the last 10 years. What has impressed me the
most about this family is their never-ending
dedication to improving the farm. Be it through
genetic selection, calf barn renovations, heifer
and dry cow facility improvements, care for
the lactating herd, or a commitment to putting
up better quality forages, the Platts strive
Corey Park
to do better today while keeping a mindful eye
on the future. The family’s easy-going nature
makes them a true pleasure to work with. On behalf
of Landmark Feeds, I wish the Platt family every success
and look forward to working with them to achieve it!”
15
15
Stahlville Farming Co.
(Stahlville Colony)
Farm
report
Innovation
makes it happen
Stahlville Colony, is located
in Rockyford, Alberta. On the
Colony Martin Waldner
is the dairy boss manager,
and Phillip Waldner is the
second man in the barn. Built
in 2008, the Colony milked
around 60 cows until a new
barn was built in 2010; they
now milk around 90-95 cows.
Martin has been working
in the barn since 2001;
Phillip takes care of the calves
and everyday chores.
16
16
Portrait of the farm
Family matters
The Stahlville Farming Co. (Stahlville Colony)
herd consists of a total of 240 Holsteins
(calves, heifers and lactating cows), including 90 cows in milk. Production averages
33 kg of milk per cow, with 4.1% fat
and 3.1% protein; the BCA is 205-210-205.
On their 12,000-acre property, Stahlville
Farming Co. grows barley silage, as well as
first- and second-cut dairy hay for the barn
on 1,000 acres of dedicated land (they do
purchase some hay, however). They also
seed wheat, barley and canola. They have
four helpers in the barn to get things done.
Martin and his wife, Sarah, have six children:
two sons, Reuben and Jason, and four
daughters, Amanda, Debbie, Dorothy and
Frieda—all enthusiastic soccer players!
When Martin isn’t working on the farm,
he enjoys fishing, riding horses, playing
volleyball and is an avid hockey fan. He also
makes time in his busy schedule to attend
a dairy conference every year. Sarah plays
a critical role on the farm, taking care
of all the cleaning.
Martin thrives on the challenge of improving
his milk production and quality. For him,
nothing could be more important than
having healthy cows! In fact, one of the
things he likes least about his work
is seeing a down cow. He is constantly
exploring new ways to increase his
production and has an insatiable thirst
for knowledge about different milk
production techniques (mixing strategies,
dry cows, calves, heifer feeding, etc.).
He attributes his success to his hardworking nature and to the fact that all
family members pitch in on the farm
to get the everyday chores done.
Praise for Landmark Feeds
“In the future, Martin
sees himself continuing
to improve his herd
by bringing new ideas
and practices
to the farm.”
Future plans
In the future, Martin sees himself continuing to improve his herd by bringing new ideas
and practices to the farm. He enjoys a great working relationship
with Phillip, and he believes that continuing to work with the
service representative and nutritionist from Landmark Feeds can
only help to make his operation better. While he acknowledges
Stahlville Farming Co. is served by the
Landmark Feeds mill in Strathmore, AB,
where their feed adviser is Owen Syverson.
They enjoy a great working relationship
with Owen, meeting regularly to discuss
short- and long-term strategies to increase
their milk production. Their dairy specialist,
Bryan Van Gorp, visits the farm every two
or three months, making suggestions
about ways to improve the barn. In general,
they are very pleased with Landmark Feeds,
especially since the proximity of the mill
means they also save money on freight—
not to mention the good service they
enjoy.
Stahlville Farming Co. (Stahlville Colony)
that farming is a never-ending job, his
plans are to “just keep milking and have
fun doing it!”
A rewarding profession
Farm profile
Stahlville Farming Co. (Stahlville Colony),
Rockyford, Alberta
Owner: Stahlville Colony
Number of head in the herd
Cows in milk
Average production
Average milk components
BCA
Types of crops
Size of property
240
90
33 kg
4.1% BF — 3.1% P
205-210-205
Barley silage, dairy hay, wheat, barley
and canola
12,000 acres
Service center: Landmark Feeds Strathmore, AB
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Owen Syverson
“Martin is a great person and manager for the
dairy operation at Stahlville Farming Company.
We have been working together for about
2½ years. The first thing I noticed about
Martin was how he always wants to learn
more—about everything! Attention to detail
and constant questions have made the dairy
barn what it is today. I look forward to future
visits with Martin and Phillip to see how we
can continue to add value to their operation.”
Owen Syverson
17
17
Wheatland Farming Co.
(Wheatland Colony)
Farm
report
Success built
on pride and dedication
Portrait of the farm
Wheatland Farming Co.
(Wheatland Colony) is located
in Rockyford, Alberta.
The dairy barn on the colony
is managed by Frank Waldner.
The Colony was built in 2006,
and the barn has been producing
milk since 2008. Frank has
been in the barn since 2010;
second man Steve Waldner
takes care of the calves.
The Wheatland Farming Co. (Wheatland
Colony) herd comprises 230 Holsteins
(calves, heifers and lactating cows), including
90 cows in milk. Production averages
34 kg of milk per cow, with 4.1% fat and
3.4% protein; the BCA is 225-238-230. On
their 7,000-acre property, Wheatland
Farming Co. (Wheatland Colony) produces
their own barley silage, as well as first- and
second-cut dairy hay for the barn on 1,000
acres of dedicated land. They also seed
wheat, barley and canola for the farm.
About three other people from the colony
help with everyday duties in the barn.
Family portrait
Frank and his wife, Miriam, have one son,
Jayden. Frank pitches in on all aspects of
the dairy farm. He also enjoys daily duties
in the shop when he has time, spending
long hours building calf shelters and steel
feeding troughs. He has a passion for riding
and training horses, and in his spare time
18
he enjoys playing volleyball and fishing. He
also owns a Border Collie that he worked
hard to train. Miriam’s role on the farm is to
keep the barn clean—she runs a tidy ship!
The couple work together to produce quality
milk, and they are very proud of their SCC
under 150,000.
Praise for Landmark Feeds
Frank enjoys everyday life in the dairy
barn. He takes great pride in training new
people who come to help with the milking.
He considers his most important achievement to be reaching 60,000 kg of milk
with a limited number of cows in his
herd—and the fact that his butterfat level
is consistently over 4%. If he had one
complaint, it would definitely be the early
mornings, but his sense of humour and
work ethic always manage to get him
through the day. While Frank acknowledges that there will always be tough
times, he believes in the power of a smile
to get things done faster and more
efficiently.
Wheatland Farming Co. (Wheatland
Colony) is served by the Landmark Feeds
mill in Strathmore, AB, where their feed
adviser is Owen Syverson. Owen visits the
farm on a regular basis to discuss things
they can do to improve operations; he
also lends a hand on beef branding days.
They always have a good time together
and laugh a lot. Overall, Frank is very
pleased with Landmark Feeds, which constantly introduces new products based on
work done at its research barn. The mill is
local, meaning the farm saves money on
freight, and the service is attentive—as
Frank says, “when there’s an issue, it gets
looked at and handled.”
“His vision for the future
is simple: In five years
from now, he wants
to still be milking cows
and making money!”
Whland Farming Co. (Wheatland Colony)
A sense of pride
Moving forward
In the future, Frank looks forward to managing his herd of
90 lactating cows in the best possible way. His vision for
the future is simple: In five years from now, he wants to still be
milking cows and making money!
Farm profile
Wheatland Farming Co. (Wheatland Colony),
Rockyford, Alberta
Owner: Wheatland Colony
Number of head in the herd
Cows in milk
Average production
Average milk components
BCA
Types of crops
Size of property
230
90
34 kg
4.1% BF — 3.4% P
225-238-230
Barley silage, hay, wheat, barley
and canola
7,000 acres
Service center: Landmark Feeds Strathmore, AB
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Owen Syverson
“Frank invited me to check out the dairy
operation when I was there for the beef branding,
not too long after Wheatland Dairy joined
Landmark Feeds. Wheatland Dairy is the
second one that I have worked with, and the
dairy industry has now become an important
part of my everyday routine. We have been
working together for about five years now.
The first thing I noticed was Frank’s sense
Owen Syverson
of humor and how much he enjoys taking care
of the barn. We’ve had a lot of laughs in the
office talking about the business and everyday duties. Frank
has been very welcoming, even giving some of our office
staff tours of the barn! I look forward to future visits,
and to seeing how we can help to improve anything
as the herd grows. I would really like to thank Frank
and Wheatland Farming Company for their business.”
19
Crikside Farm
Farm
report
A rewarding
career
Crikside Farm, located in
Woodmore, Manitoba, is
owned by Candace Grier and
Louis Guimond. Originally
purchased by Audrey and
Morris Grier in 1957, the farm
started off with cream quota
and later bought its first
six Brown Swiss cows in 1961.
Portrait of the farm
The next generation
The Crikside Farm herd consists of a total
of 124 Brown Swiss head, 76 are in the milk
herd including 50 that are milked, and the
rest are replacements. The herd classification is EX 10, VG 16, GP 33, G 2. Production
averages 6,755 kg of milk, with 4.1%
butterfat (278 kg) and 3.5% protein (234 kg).
On their 800-acre property, Crikside Farm
grows crops mostly for forage: oats, peas,
alfalfa, grass, and sometimes millet or
sorghum for silage. Their three children
work on the farm, and their 16-year-old
nephew lends a hand during summer
vacations.
Candace and Louis have three teenagers:
Alice, 17, Robert, 16, and Theresa, 13.
All of the children have been members of
4-H and are involved in showing the farm’s
animals at the Morris Stampede Junior
Show. On the farm, Alice takes care of public
relations, Robert works the tractor, and
Theresa is the dairy farmer of the bunch—
very consistent and detail-oriented, she
spends a great deal of time caring for the
animals and hopes to one day complete
a degree in Agriculture. During their down
time, Alice and Robert play hockey and
Theresa does taekwondo and gymnastics.
Morris Stampede
20
Future plans
The couple loves the fact that farming
allows them to work at home and raise
their family in the great outdoors. They
also appreciate being able to grow their
own food—nothing beats washing down
a delicious, home-cooked meal with
a glass of fresh, unpasteurized milk! Their
only complaint would be having to work
on holidays, but that pales in comparison
to the pride they feel for their family farm
and their Brown Swiss cattle, quiet cows
with great feet and legs, and good
longevity. On the farm, Louis (who qualified as a herdsman at the agricultural
college in Hutchinson, Minnesota)
manages feed quality and rations, while
Candace puts her Agriculture diploma
to good use doing the accounting and
budgeting, and overseeing crop science
and animal production. She also credits
their veterinarian with teaching her a
great deal. According to her, “When one
of your best cows has a heifer calf, that’s
always a good day on the farm!”
Candace and Louis’ plans for the next few
years are to build a calf barn and stay
at 50 cows. However, they recently
received a quota increase, which is
always a good day on the farm! Candace
points out that the Canadian dairy industry has begun emphasizing milk quality,
a fact that will reverberate positively
throughout the industry.
Crikside Farm
A rewarding profession
Praise for Landmark Feeds
“Candace points out
that the Canadian dairy
industry has begun
emphasizing milk
quality, a fact that
will reverberate
positively throughout
the industry.”
Crikside Farm is served by the Landmark
Feeds mill in Otterburne, MB, where their
feed adviser is Chris Elias. He makes
regular visits to the farm and is interested
in how the herd is doing. He addresses
problems quickly and is always ready with
a suggestion. Candace has nothing but
high praise for the entire team at the feed
mill: “They’re amazing! The truck drivers
are always courteous and helpful. The mill
is prompt with deliveries and helpful in
times of short notice. The feed is excellent
and the cows love it.” The mill also offers
several customer appreciation and
educational events, a fact that earns
them bonus points from the folks on
Crikside Farm!
Farm profile
Crikside Farm, Woodmore, Manitoba
Owners: Candace Grier and Louis Guimond
Number of head in the herd
Cows in milk
Average production
Average milk components
Classification
Types of crops
Size of property
124
50
6,755 kg (305 day)
4.1% (278 kg) BF — 3.5% (234 kg) P
EX 10 – VG 16 – GP 33 – G 2
oats, peas, alfalfa, grass,
sometimes millet or sorghum
for silage
800 acres
Service center: Landmark Feeds Otterburne, MB
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Chris Elias
“It’s already been nine years since I started
working with Louis and Candace and their
family. Their approach to farming remains
consistent—keep it simple, raise high-quality
cattle, and enjoy activities off the farm. This is
very evident when looking at the cows out
in the pasture, discussing the latest classification round, or talking about the multiple sports
tournaments that may have taken place over
the weekend. Farm calls are always enjoyable
and it’s great to see each of the kids playing
a role! We’d like to thank them for their business and we look forward to the years ahead.”
Chris Elias
21
22
Welcome aboard!
Dan grew up on the family dairy farm in Chilliwack, BC. In 1997,
he graduated from the University of Saskatchewan with a Bachelor
of Science in Agriculture with a major in Animal Science. After
graduation, he worked for Westgen as a sales representative
in Alberta, later becoming Regional Manager for the province.
Married for 16 years, Dan and his wife, Monique, share a passion
for traveling. Other hobbies include running, cycling and golfing.
Dan Chapman
Location: Strathmore, AB
23
23
RETURN ON INVESTMENT:
*
TO
1
VIVALTO®
maintains the full value
of your milk components!
Despite superior yield, fat
and protein content will
remain unaffected.
Take advantage now!
IT MAKES A REAL SPLASH!
VIVALTO® is a new product designed for lactating cows. When
cows were fed VIVALTO® just after calving in a controlled study,
milk production increased by 2.7 kg/cow/day compared
to the control cows [results observed from 0 to 200 days
of lactation].
It is a unique and exclusive additive, a combination of cofactors that have
ILLUZOV^U[VZ\WWVY[SP]LYM\UJ[PVUILULÄ[PUN[OLWVZ[HIZVYW[P]LLMÄJPLUJ`
of feedstuffs.
It’s one of LANDMARK FEEDS’ most remarkable innovations and the result
of three full years of research.
The main advantages of this product are that it does not affect the milk
components and it is easy to use. Just add VIVALTO® to the feed, and you’re
done. What this means for you: More milk, same feed.
,MÄJPLU[`LZI\[HIV]LHSS]HZ[S`WYVÄ[HISL
24
THE POWER OF RESEARCH WITHIN YOUR REACH
LF140137
*Return on Investment 0-200 days based on the Ontario average milk price and components from September 2011 to August 2012, and the Québec average milk price
and components from August 2011 to July 2012. Income and ROI will vary based on the fat, protein and SNF price paid and cost of feeding VIVALTO ®.