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

Dr. Sabine Mann, Cornell University; Dr. Will Mustas, Progressive Dairy Solutions; Dr. Don Niles, Dairy Dreams LLC; and Joey Airosa, Airosa Dairy Farms, introduce themselves. (0:48)

Dr. Mann outlines the high points of her presentation. Giving an adequate amount of high-quality colostrum quickly after birth is essential to equip the calf with the best chances to stay healthy. Colostrum is more than a solution of water and immunoglobulins, and we are continuing to learn more about other nutrients and growth factors that colostrum contains. (12:03)

Dr. Niles and Mr. Airosa talk about colostrum and maternity protocols on their dairies. Each has dedicated maternity staff in charge of postnatal calf care. Don mentions they often have public tours of their dairy and shares some anecdotes. Joey’s maternity staff try to get colostrum in calves within 30 minutes of birth and have worked out a good communication system to ensure seamless calf care when shift changes occur. (13:57)

Dr. Mann emphasizes the timing of colostrum delivery is critical. But what about the amount? Should every calf get four liters? Joey notes they bottle feed and have settled on three quarts for Holstein calves and two quarts for Jersey calves. Sabine says research backs that up - calves will not voluntarily drink much more than 3-3.5 liters. Using esophageal feeders to give four liters could be overfeeding in some cases, which could cause slower emptying of the stomach and thus slower arrival and uptake of immunoglobulins at the small intestine. The four liter recommendation came from the idea that good quality colostrum probably had about 50 grams per liter of IgG, and at that time, we wanted to get 200 grams into the calf. Perhaps making a sheet with recommended amounts based on calf weights could be helpful for maternity staff. Dr. Mann also clarifies that the 50 grams per liter of IgG is not really good quality colostrum. Most herds average about 90-100 grams per liter of IgG in colostrum. She recommends every farm find out how good their colostrum is and optimize feeding amounts from there. (22:45)

Dr. Mann notes the importance of making sure dry cows are not deficient in protein supply and ensuring the dry period is long enough to create high-quality colostrum. While it’s commonly thought older cows have better colostrum than young cows, she underlines again the importance of measuring colostrum quality to know for sure. She also highly recommends measuring colostrum quality from individual cows before pooling so that poor colostrum does not dilute good colostrum. (31:04)

Dr. Mustas shares some of the challenges he’s seeing on dairies where he consults. What can we do to control the bacteriological quality of colostrum? He notes there’s no reason we can’t get very low bacteria counts pre-pasteurization. Making sure maternity areas are clean and sanitary, udders are prepped very well, and harvesting equipment is not neglected are all great strategies. (35:53)

Dr. Mann talks about individual cow variation in colostrum production and some factors that might influence including placental interactions, hormones, and genetics. (38:04)

Scott and Sabine discuss some of the research around supplementing with choline during the dry period and subsequent colostrum production. (41:28)

Dr. Niles comments that pasteurization of colostrum has been one of the most exciting technologies to come along. On his farm, the pasteurizer has given them much more control over colostrum quality and delivery time. Dr. Mann agrees storage of colostrum has given dairies the ability to be strategic about how they use colostrum, what colostrum they use, and to also plan for seasonal colostrum shortages. She agrees with Dr. Mustas that clean colostrum harvesting equipment is key to low bacterial counts. (44:13)

Dr. Mustas talks about how the beef-on-dairy phenomenon has altered colostrum protocols. Calf ranches are giving deductions for poor colostrum scores when calves are received. Some operations even offer premiums or discounts on daily yardage depending on individual calf colostrum scores. (50:21)

Joey, Don, and Sabine comment on the importance of finding the right people to work in maternity and instilling the idea that taking care of cows and calves is both a great responsibility and a great honor. (52:56)

The panel wraps up with their take-home thoughts. (58:31)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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