Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Optimizing Facilities for Transition Cow Success- Ken Nordlund

8,415 views

Published on

This material was presented by Dr. Ken Nordlund for DAIReXNET's December 14, 2010 webinar of the same title.

  • This material was presented during DAIReXNET’s December 14, 2010 webinar entitled 'Optimizing Facilities for Transition Cow Success'. The recorded versions of all of our webinars are located at http://www.extension.org/pages/15830/archived-dairy-cattle-webinars.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Optimizing Facilities for Transition Cow Success- Ken Nordlund

  1. 1. Optimizing Facilities for Transition Cow Success Ken Nordlund, DVM University of Wisconsin-Madison DAIReXNET Dec. 14, 2010
  2. 2. Nordlund McGuirk Oetzel Cook Food Animal Production Medicine Group Dopfer
  3. 3. Topics <ul><li>What is Transition Cow Index (TCI ® )? </li></ul><ul><li>Surveys of industry management practices </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wisconsin freestall </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Western open lot </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Application to new barn construction </li></ul>
  4. 4. What is TCI ® ? <ul><li>Acronym for Transition Cow Index ® </li></ul><ul><li>System of evaluating transition cow management programs </li></ul><ul><li>Basis is that sick fresh cows produce less milk </li></ul><ul><li>Actual milk yield on 1 st test date is compared to expectations </li></ul>
  5. 5. Milk yield and various fresh cow diseases ▬ Healthy X Digestive disorder ■ Ketosis ▲Displaced abomasum Edwards & Tozer. 2004. JDS 87:524-531
  6. 6. Modified from Østergaard & Gröhn. 1999. JDS 82:1188 Median DIM at 1 st Test
  7. 7. Transition Cow Index ® <ul><li>AgSource DHIA data from half-million cows for 2 yrs </li></ul><ul><li>Matched 4,000 herds with Posilac purchase records </li></ul><ul><li>Used “historical” data in mixed model to predict expected 1 st test milk between 5-40 DIM </li></ul><ul><li>TCI = difference between expected and actual 1 st test milk yield </li></ul><ul><li>Two forms </li></ul><ul><ul><li>TCI-D ® : units are lbs of daily milk on 1 st test date </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>TCI ® : units are lbs of 1 st test 305-day projected milk </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Transition Cow Index ® (TCI ® ) or (TCI-D ® ) Breed Posilac Milking frequency Calving month Days dry Prior SCC Etc. Abort? Prior milk - TCI + TCI - TCI-D + TCI-D Prior lactation length Nordlund, Proc AABP, 2006 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
  9. 9. <ul><li>Owned by WARF, the technology transfer unit of the University of Wisconsin </li></ul><ul><li>Licensed to AgSource, the Wisconsin-based DHIA service since 2006 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can access through DairyOne in New York and AgSource services in the Southwest US </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Licensed to Valacta in Quebec in 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>TCI-D ® has been licensed for use across the US and may become more available </li></ul>Availability of TCI ® ?
  10. 10. What is the association of TCI ® with subsequent survival and milk yield?
  11. 11. -20,000 -10,000 0 10,000 20,000 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 Association of TCI with survival to next lactation Probability Records of 194,402 cows in 4,025 herds TCI 20,000 lbs TCI associated with 48% increased survival rate, or 2.4% per 1,000 lbs
  12. 12. TCI ® and subsequent milk yield <ul><li>What is the association of TCI with subsequent milk production? </li></ul><ul><li>Cumulative milk is “ actual ” milk produced before subsequent dry-off or culling, not standardized to 305 days </li></ul>
  13. 13. Data from 193,235 cows in 4,011 herds
  14. 14. TCI ® and subsequent milk yield <ul><li>Regression equation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cumulative milk = 23,484 + (1.31 x TCI) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Each lb TCI associated with 1.3 lbs milk in the lactation </li></ul>
  15. 15. Economics of 1,000 lb TCI ® <ul><li>Reduced turnover rate of 2.5% </li></ul><ul><ul><li>$1500 Replacement - $500 Cull = $1,000 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2.5% x $1,000 = $25 per cow per year </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Increased milk yield of 1,300 lbs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1,300 lbs milk = $97 income over feed cost (IOFC) at $0.15/lb milk and IOFC 50% of gross </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sum = $122 IOFC per cow per year </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Does not include any estimate of reproductive benefits or reduced disease treatment costs </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Topics <ul><li>What is TCI ® ? </li></ul><ul><li>Surveys of industry management practices </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wisconsin freestall </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Western open lot </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Application to new barn construction </li></ul>
  17. 17. Using TCI ® in field studies <ul><li>TCI is not dependent upon disease event records </li></ul><ul><li>Can be calculated for any herd with archived DHIA records </li></ul><ul><li>Reflects preventive programs, detection & treatment programs, and early lactation nutrition </li></ul><ul><li>Allows herd transition management to be characterized in an objective manner if daily milk weights are accurate </li></ul>
  18. 18. Wisconsin Freestall Survey <ul><li>Transition mgt practices of 50 larger Wisconsin freestall herds using AgSource DHI testing services </li></ul><ul><li>Stratified random selection representing range in annual herd avg TCI score from -4,000 to +2,500 lb </li></ul><ul><li>Herd average size ~600 cows (range 300 – 1,600) </li></ul><ul><li>Financial support from Pfizer Animal Health </li></ul>
  19. 20. Freestall Risk Factors Evaluated <ul><li>Routine management practices – Posilac, dry rx, Orbeseal, vaccines, milking freq, etc </li></ul><ul><li>Cow-level data – BCS, hygiene, avoidance in prefresh and postfresh pens </li></ul><ul><li>Nutritional data – prefresh and postfresh rations </li></ul><ul><li>Pen move policy and stocking density </li></ul><ul><li>Housing information – freestalls, pens, feedbunks </li></ul><ul><li>Herdsman interview – screening, dx and rx protocols </li></ul>
  20. 21. Wisconsin Freestall Study <ul><li>Significant risk factors for herd average TCI, p<0.05 </li></ul><ul><li>Bunkspace, prefresh pen and fresh pen </li></ul><ul><li>Freestall base (sand vs mattress) </li></ul><ul><li>Freestall size, area </li></ul><ul><li>Move to calving pen ( ≤ 2 days vs 3+ days) </li></ul><ul><li>Screening method (4 categories) </li></ul>
  21. 22. Prefresh bunk space was the single most significant risk factor for TCI
  22. 23. <ul><li>Stall Factors </li></ul><ul><li>Stall surface (ls means) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mattress barns (-) 675 lbs TCI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sand barns (+) 560 lbs TCI </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Dimensions (width x length including available forward lunge) </li></ul>
  23. 24. Movement into calving pens 3-10 days prior to due date associated with lower TCI than movement ≤2 days Maternity or calving pens
  24. 25. How about the rations?
  25. 27. Western Open Lot Survey <ul><li>Convenience sample of 25 herds in Arizona, California, Idaho, & New Mexico in 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Average herd size 4,000 cows (range 2,000-11,000) </li></ul><ul><li>Financial support from Pfizer Animal Health </li></ul>
  26. 30. Open Lot Risk Factors Evaluated <ul><li>Routine management practices – Posilac use, dry rx, Orbeseal, milking freq </li></ul><ul><li>Prefresh cow data – BCS, locomotion scores </li></ul><ul><li>Pen move policy and headlock stocking density </li></ul><ul><li>Housing information – feedbunks, shade, bedding under shades, cooling, water access space, distance to parlor </li></ul>
  27. 31. Western Open Lot Study <ul><li>Significant risk factors for herd average TCI, p<0.05 </li></ul><ul><li>Bunkspace, prefresh pen and fresh pen </li></ul><ul><li>Locomotion score, %3&4 on 4-pt scale </li></ul><ul><li>Body condition score outliers, % ≤2.5 & ≥4 </li></ul><ul><li>Move to calving pen ( ≤ 2 days vs 3+ days) </li></ul><ul><li>Shade (yes,no) </li></ul>
  28. 32. Transition pen bunk space was again the single most important risk factor for TCI
  29. 33. Prevalence of lame cows was negatively associated with herd TCI average
  30. 34. Depth of bedding below shade had negative association with prevalence of lameness
  31. 37. Topics <ul><li>What is TCI ® ? </li></ul><ul><li>Surveys of industry management practices </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wisconsin freestall </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Western open lot </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Application to new barn construction </li></ul>
  32. 38. http://thedairylandinitiative.vetmed.wisc.edu/
  33. 39. How much bunk space?
  34. 40. Primary & secondary peaks in feed bunk utilization Primary Peak Secondary Peak Secondary Peak Mentink & Cook, JDS, 2006
  35. 41. Feeding space video study <ul><li>Maximum fill rate of 24-inch headlocks is ~80% </li></ul><ul><li>Independent of stocking pressure in pen </li></ul><ul><li>Minimal space = 30 inches per cow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(30 = 24 inches ÷ 0.80) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Standard 2-row pen = 24 inches per cow </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 3-row pen = 16 inches per cow </li></ul><ul><li>Overstocking of stalls reduces bunk space further </li></ul>
  36. 42. 30” headlocks, one per cow
  37. 43. Sand or other deeply bedded surface
  38. 44. Effect of stall base on lameness prevalence Lameness prevalence, % of herd Cook, JAVMA, 2002 Summer Winter
  39. 45. Sand / mattress study design <ul><li>Six sand barns ( three 4-row, three 6-row ) </li></ul><ul><li>Six mattress barns ( three 4-row, three 6-row ) </li></ul><ul><li>No expansion within past 2 years </li></ul>Cook, et al., JDS, 2004
  40. 46. Daily Time Budgets and Stall Base – Locomotion Score Interaction Cook, et al., JDS, 2004 Sand Mattress
  41. 47. Freestall size <ul><li>Too small for modern mature Holstein cows! </li></ul><ul><li>Dimensions originated in the 70’s (MWPS-5) </li></ul><ul><li>Cows have gotten bigger (Hansen, JDS, 2000) </li></ul><ul><li>Understanding of ergonomics has improved </li></ul>66” 45”
  42. 48. Prefresh stalls - mature cow groups = 52” W & 9-10’ L Mixed groups with heifers = 48-49” wide
  43. 49. Social turmoil following regrouping Kondo & Hurnik, (1990) Appl. An. Behav. Sci 27:287-297
  44. 50. Social turmoil profile of a pen Weekly entries into pen Daily entries into pen etc…. One-time entry into pen
  45. 51. -11 to -20 days -20 to -30 days -0 to -10 days Traditional close-up pen - Constant social turmoil with frequent entries and continual exits for 20+ days Stable social groups before calving - Establish social order once, remain intact until calving
  46. 52. For ~55-day dry period, establish series of 5 pens each with cohorts expected to calve within a 10-day window Open Lots
  47. 53. Cows calve in the last pen of the series where they can be observed
  48. 54. Labor is reduced because “close up” cows do not need to be sorted out of a big “far dry” pen As the calving pen empties, each subsequent cohort is moved in series toward the calving area
  49. 55. In housed cows, the practices diverge around where calving occurs
  50. 56. Close-up / Calving Pens: Stable social groups of ~10 move onto pack ~21 days before due date. The cows deliver on the pack.
  51. 57. Stable social groups of ~25 assembled at dry off and remain intact until each individual cow begins labor
  52. 58. 2-row head-to-tail prefresh pen so that any cow beginning labor can be seen from the feed alley
  53. 59. Optimal transition barns <ul><li>Bunk space for all cows to eat simultaneously </li></ul><ul><li>Minimize lameness with deep, soft bedded surfaces </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Sand-based freestalls </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Deep bedded packs </li></ul></ul><ul><li>If freestalls, amply sized for mature cows </li></ul><ul><li>Stabilize social groupings </li></ul><ul><li>Provide these conditions even during surges in calvings </li></ul>
  54. 60. Sizing the pens
  55. 61. Traditional method of pen sizing <ul><li>Example: 1,600 cow herd </li></ul><ul><li>How many calvings per week? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>7 days in a week divided by 365 days equals 1.9% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1.9% of 1,600 cows equals 31 cows per week </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How long is close-up period? 3 weeks! </li></ul><ul><ul><li>3 wk x 31 cows/wk = 93 stalls </li></ul></ul>
  56. 62. Avg = 28 per week Range = 15 to 40 (54%-143% of avg) Guideline: “Overbuild” for surges 3-wk period:130-140% of wk avg 8-wk period: 120% of wk avg
  57. 63. Basic Point <ul><li>These recommendations apply to the prefresh and postfresh periods, not the entire herd </li></ul><ul><li>Each transition stall gets used for a period of 3-7 weeks </li></ul><ul><li>Each transition stall is a risk factor for not one , but 7-15 cows per year! </li></ul>
  58. 64. July 2009 – “Okay, let’s build one!”
  59. 65. <ul><li>Response of >1,400 lbs TCI ® </li></ul><ul><li>Each 1,000 lbs TCI ® associated with ~$122 income over feed cost </li></ul><ul><li>Expected benefit $170 IOFC per cow per yr </li></ul>+530 +1,988
  60. 66. Costs of “excess & oversized” stalls? <ul><li>Assumptions: </li></ul><ul><li>1,000 cows = 1,050 calvings per year </li></ul><ul><li>1,050 / yr ÷ 52 wks = 20 calvings per wk </li></ul><ul><li>Average freestall = $2,500 per stall </li></ul><ul><li>Wider, longer stalls = $2,800 per stall </li></ul><ul><li>“ Overbuild” capacity for close-up period of 3 wks at 140% of avg </li></ul><ul><li>“ Overbuild” capacity of fresh pen for 3 wks at 130% of avg </li></ul>
  61. 67. Costs – 1,000 cow example $68,400 per 1,000 cows Added cost $218,400 $150,000 Total cost $2,800 $2,500 Avg cost / stall 42 stalls per 1000 cows Additional stalls 78 stalls 60 stalls Fresh (3 wk) 84 stalls 60 stalls Close up (3 wk) Same Same Far dry pens Same Same Lactation pens TCI-friendly Traditional
  62. 68. Costs – 1,000 cow example <ul><li>Amortize $68,400 over 5 yr at 10% interest </li></ul><ul><li>Annual payment = $26,400 </li></ul><ul><li>Cow-friendly barn costs an additional $26,400 more per year for 5 years </li></ul>$68,400 per 1,000 cows Added cost $218,400 $150,000 Total cost $2,800 $2,500 Avg cost / stall 42 stalls per 1000 cows Additional stalls TCI-friendly Traditional
  63. 69. Costs Benefits– 1,000 cow example <ul><li>Added annual payment = ($26,400) yr 5 yr </li></ul><ul><li>$26/400 ÷ 1000 cows = ($26) per cow per yr </li></ul><ul><li>Herd response suggests >1,400 lb TCI improvement = $170 IOFC per cow per yr </li></ul><ul><li>$170 - $26 = $145 per cow per year </li></ul><ul><li>(not counting ↓drugs, labor, or barn life>5 yrs) </li></ul>
  64. 70. http://thedairylandinitiative.vetmed.wisc.edu/
  65. 73. http://thedairylandinitiative.vetmed.wisc.edu/
  66. 74. Are you soon done?
  67. 75. Summary <ul><li>TCI provides an objective measure of herd-level transition management and fresh cow health </li></ul><ul><li>Field surveys using TCI suggest that bunk space, minimizing lameness via better stalls and surfaces, and stabilizing social groups are key management factors </li></ul><ul><li>Impact of improved TCI on subsequent survival and milk yield will pay for high quality transition cow housing </li></ul>

×