supplements – hlhow low can you go? - university of...

Supplements H l ?– How low can you go?

John RochePrincipal Scientist, Animal SciencePrincipal Scientist, Animal ScienceManaging Director, Down to Earth Advice Ltd.

Annual meeting of single, good looking, straight, emotionally stable, financially-secure nutritionists aiming to make you money, y g y y

How low can you go?How low can you go?


“It all depends on the point of viewIt all depends on the point of viewand who tells the story!”

-Aesop Maxim

Are youAre you

• A vet/animal scientistA vet/animal scientist─All about cow efficiency

• A farmer driven by vanity and what others thinky y─My herd average production must be greater than X

• Profit-focussed farmer but loves cows─Operating profit/acre important but cow focussed

• A pragmatic, profit-focussed farmerCost of production Operating profit/acre and ROA─Cost of production, Operating profit/acre and ROA focussed

Why feed supplementsWhy feed supplements• Increase milk productionp

─Dilution of maintenance and increased productivity

• Reduce BCS loss/increase BCS gain─BCS important for getting cows in calf

• Get more cows in-calfP t t ffi i t ►S l t i DMI─Pasture not sufficient ►Supplements increase DMI

• Not enough pasture─Genuine feed restrictionGenuine feed restriction

“About almost anyysubject, there are the facts‘everyone knows’ andthen there are the realthen there are the realones”ones

-Ernest G. Ross

Supplements and milk production

The older I get, the better I was!

Starch

Fibre

Carbohydrate Metabolism

Fibre Non-fibre

But, what about the “whoof” factor

The “whoof” factor!

Urea VFA Energy

Feed: ProteinFeed: ProteinCH2O NH3, AA,

peptidesCH2O

peptides

Microbial proteinEscape

feed protein

“Whoof” factor = speed of CH2O release

Carbohydrate %/hrCorn 10 to 20Barley 20 to 30Wheat 35 to 45

High quality 12 to 16Pasture

Molasses 250+

Sniffen et al., 1992; Kolver, 1997

“Whoof” factor = speed of CH2O release

Carbohydrate %/hr Protein %/hrCorn 10 to 20Barley 20 to 30

Rapid 250+

Wheat 35 to 45

High quality 12 to 16Pasture

Slow 20 to 25

Molasses 250+

Sniffen et al., 1992; Kolver, 1997

• 100% pasture or 85% pasture +15% supplement─Replacement (Isoenergetic)

OrOr• 100% pasture +10-15% supplement

Extra─Extra

• No increase in efficiency of ruminal N utilisation.• No increase in microbial protein• No increase in microbial protein.

Pasture Conc Replace Conc ExtraPasture Conc. Replace Conc. Extra

Milk, lb/d 48.2 47.5 49.3

Fat % 4 74 4 51 4 46

Experiment 1Fat, % 4.74 4.51 4.46

Protein, % 3.37 3.39 3.42

Pasture Conc. Replace Conc. Extra

Milk, lb/d 22.7 24.0 25.5Experiment 2Fat, % 5.08 4.83 4.80

Protein, % 3.53 3.51 3.55

p

• Isoenergetic diets─Replaced pasture energy with concentrate energy (12.5 lb/d)p p gy gy ( )

Pasture Concentrates

NEL Intake, MCal/d 12 12

Milk, lb/d 50.4 53.2

Fat, % 4.99 4.40

Protein, % 3.48 3.53

Supply and DemandF d P t iFeed Protein Urine,

MilkUrea

NH3, AA,

MicrobialCH2OEscape

f d t i

3peptides AA synthesis

Protein turnoverMicrobial protein

AA oxidationGluconeogenesis Protein synthesis

feed protein

ExportyAA use

EndogenousTissues

Rumenpo

Endogenous protein

Undigested

CH2O

Digested Protein

AA

Large IntestinegProteinSmall Intestine

Courtesy of M.B. Hall, 2007

Supplements only increase milk production if theymilk production if they increase energy intake.

There is nothing magicalThere is nothing magical happening.

Let’s assume energy intake is i dincreased.

What is the milk production response to supplements?response to supplements?

Ruakura Farmers Conference, 1999

Farms stocked at 1.8 cows/ac

1.17 lb milk/lb fed

1.17 lb milk/lb fed

Multiyear project → System response (BCS included)• 929, 2,002, or 3,807 lb concentrates/yeary• 14,000 to 18,000 lb milk/cow/year

• Medium Merit = 0.6 to 0.7 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

• High Merit = 0.8 to 1.0 lb milk/lb concentrates fedg

• High Merit and Low merit cows• 1 6 or 12 lb concentrates/cow/d1, 6 or 12 lb concentrates/cow/d

• Medium merit response = 0.90 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

• High merit response = 0.95 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

• NA-type HF and NZ HF cows• either 900 or 3 600 lb/coweither 900 or 3,600 lb/cow

• NA HF response = 0.99 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

• NZ HF response = 0.51 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

• NA HF and NZ HF cows•0 2076 or 4 077 lb/cow0, 2076, or 4,077 lb/cow•0, 7, or 14lb/cow/d

NA HF 1 1 lb ilk/lb t t f d• NA HF response = 1.1 lb milk/lb concentrates fed0.8 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

• NZ HF response = 0 8 lb milk/lb concentrates fed• NZ HF response = 0.8 lb milk/lb concentrates fed0.3 lb milk/lb concentrates fed

20000969 t 3 478 y = 1.16x + 12573

R² = 0.9917500k/

cow

• 969 to 3,478 lb supplement13 724 t

15000

Lb m

ilk• 13,724 to 16,647 lb/cow

12500- 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

Lb concentrates/cowLb concentrates/cow

• 0, 7, and 14 lb conc/cow/d• 1 ton or 2 ton/cow/yr• 12,000 to 15,000 lb milk/cow

• 1.0 lb and 0.34 lb/lb fed

• Supplementation reduced grazing time by 12 min/kg concentrateconcentrate

• Response to supplements = 0.9 lb milk/lb concentrate

Response to supplementsResponse to supplementsResidual Response

1 200 to 1 350 1 0 to 1 2

lb/ac Lb milk

1,200 to 1,350 (6.0 to 7.0 clicks)

1 350 to 1 800 0 5 to 1 0

1.0 to 1.2

1,350 to 1,800 (7.0 to 9.5 clicks)

0.5 to 1.0

>1,800 (>9.5 clicks)

neg to 0.5

But what about the 1 in 200 rule

Expense Free

1.16 lb milk/lb concentrates

Cows supplemented for 12 Wk

90Response: 0.75 lb/lb concentrate

607080

w, l

b/d

30405060

yiel

d/co

w

Pasture

102030

Milk

y

7 lb concentrates/d

14 lb concentrates/d

00 10 20 30 40

W k f l t ti

Roche et al., unpublished

Week of lactation

Well that’s research trials.Wh t b t fWhat about on-farm responses.

Average: 0.4 to 0.5 lb/lb supplement fed

Canterbury data: Average response to supplements per ha

2000

supplements per haApprox:0.4 to 0.5 lb milk/lb concentrate

y = 41x + 1590R² = 0.04

17501750

g M

S/ha

1500kg

12500 0 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 00.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Tonnes of feed imported/ha

“The problem with facts is that you can proveis that you can prove anything with facts!”

-Homer J Simpson

So: what’s your response rate?

Body condition scoreBody condition score

Effect of concentrates on BCSEffect of concentrates on BCS4.00 Pasture

7 lb concentrates/d = 1 ton/year

3.50

cale

7 lb concentrates/d = 1 ton/year

14 lb concentrates/d = 2 ton/yearX

3.00

S, 1

to 5

sc

X

X

2.50BC

S

1 ton concentrates = ¼ BCS units

In NZ cows2.00

0 50 100 150 200 250 300D i ilk

In NZ cows

Days in milk

Effect of concentrates on BCSEffect of concentrates on BCS4.00 Pasture

7 lb concentrates = 1 ton/year

3.50

cale



3.00

S, 1

to 5

sc

X

XX2.50B

CS XX

2 ton concentrates = ¼ BCS units in US HF

2.000 50 100 150 200 250 300

D i ilkDays in milk

Every 1/8 BCS increase at nadir: 1% better PFS, 1% better 6-wk in calf1% better 12-wk in calf

2 1 2 3 2 4 2 6 2 8 2 9 3 010-point scale

5 point scale 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 2.9 3.05-point scale

But, don’t I need concentrates to get cows in calfcows in calf

Supplements not required to get cows in calf(f M d ld 1999)

Optimal Pasture + Pasture + Pasture +

(from Macdonald 1999)

all-pasture maize grain maize silage balanced ration

SR, cows/ac 1.35 1.8 1.8 1.8Supplement, lb DM/cow 409 3,069 2,814 3,208

Days to first heat 42 42 45 46Services/conception 1.62 1.63 1.63 1.60pAI pregnancy rate, % 76 80 81 80In-calf rate, % 91 93 92 91 Cows not cycling at PSM % 11 11 13 17Cows not cycling at PSM, % 11 11 13 17

InCalf Project: Supplements not associated with reproduction

(Morton 2001)

37 Australian herds with low and high levels of supplementation on pasture had the same:supplementation on pasture had the same:

3-week submission rates (76%)3 ee sub ss o ates ( 6%)First insemination conception rates (50%)6 week in calf rate (66%)6-week in-calf rate (66%)21-week in-calf rate (92%)

What about profit?What about profit?

“Those engaged in the productionof milk for human consumption area peculiar people - hard toa peculiar people - hard tounderstand. They very seldom takeinto consideration the cost ofproduction ”production…..

Cost of production is the No 1 driver of profit in NZNo. 1 driver of profit in NZ

3,500 2005/06

y = -908.1x + 4249.R² = 0 722 000

2,5003,000,

t $/h

a

2005/06

R 0.72

1,0001,5002,000

ng P

rofit

-5000

500

Ope

rati

-1,000500

2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50

Source: DairyNZ Economics Group, 2005-06 DairyBase Economic Survey

Operating Expenses $/Kg MS


2006/072006/07

y = -878.6x + 4177.R² = 0 703 000

3,5004,000

/ha

R² = 0.70

1 5002,0002,5003,000

Prof

it $/

0500

1,0001,500

pera

ting

-1,000-500

0

2 00 2 50 3 00 3 50 4 00 4 50 5 00 5 50

Op


2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50Operating Expenses $/Kg MS


2007/088000 2007/08

y = -979.7x + 7678.600070008000

$/ha

yR² = 0.54

40005000

ng p

rofit

100020003000

Ope

ratin

01000

2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00


Operating Expenses per kg MS

Operating expenses explain more than 50% operating profitmore than 50% operating profit in on-farm Canterbury study

9000

7500800085009000

$/ha

650070007500

g Pr

ofit

y = -1426.x + 12642500055006000

Ope

ratin

y 6 6R² = 0.53

40004500

$2 50 $3 00 $3 50 $4 00 $4 50 $5 00 $5 50

O

$2.50 $3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.00 $5.50Operating Expense $/kg MS

What about milk yield/cowWhat about milk yield/cow

Milk yield vs Profit in the USAMilk yield vs Profit in the USA

Operating profit vs Milk yield/cow

y = 4 9x 660 43,500

y = 4.9x - 660.4R² = 0.14

2 0002,5003,000

t $/h

a

1,0001,5002,000

ng p

rofit

5000

500

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Ope

rati

-1,000-500 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

kg MS/cow

ROA vs Milk yield/cowROA vs Milk yield/cow7.0%

Source: David Beca, RedSky, Australia

R² = 0.73

5 0%

6.0%

4.0%

5.0%

RO

A

%

3.0%

2.0%3500 4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 10500

Milk yield/cow, kgy , g

Core per cow costs vs Milk Yield/cow

$700 Source: David Beca, RedSky, Australia

R² = 0.97$600

w c

osts

$500

e pe

r cow

$300

$400

Cor

e

$3003500 4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500

Milk yield/cow, kg

Labour use efficiency vs Milk yield/cowSource: David Beca RedSky AustraliaSource: David Beca, RedSky, Australia

R² = 0.95140

150

FTE

120

130

y, c

ows/

F

100

110

ffici

ency

80

90

Labo

ur e

f

60

70

3,500 4,500 5,500 6,500 7,500 8,500 9,500

L

Milk yield/cow, Litres/Cow

The more pasture in the diet, the lower the costof milk productionof milk production

6

8

/kgM

S

NLUKUS Confinement

US GrazingDK

GER

4

6

oduc

tion,

$/

IRE

FR

2

t of m

ilk p

ro

NZ

IRE

AU

00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Cos

t

Dillon, P., et al. 2005.

Proportion of grazed grass in the diet

Supplements vs. Op. Profit

9000

in on-farm Canterbury study

y = -8318.x + 7990.R² = 0.448000

9000

$/ha

6000

7000

ng p

rofit

5000

6000

Ope

ratin

40000.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%

% of Total feed offered as purchased supplements

To concludeTo conclude

Are youAre you• A vet/animal scientist 10+lb/d

─ All about cow efficiency

• A farmer driven by vanity and what others think─ My herd average production must be greater than X

8 to 10 lb/d

• Profit-focussed farmer but loves cows─ Operating profit/acre important but cow focussed

• A pragmatic profit-focussed farmer

4 to 6 lb/d

<0 lb/dA pragmatic, profit focussed farmer─ Cost of production, Operating profit/acre and ROE focussed

<0 lb/d

“Milk yield is vanity. Profit is sanity!”-Michael Murphy

“He who doesn’t learn from history is doomed to repeat it.” Old Chi P b– Old Chinese Proverb

“Many receive advice. Only the wise profit from it”– Old Roman Proverb

“Supplements will fill the bucket and empty the wallet”– New Irish Proverb

supplements – hlhow low can you go? - university of...

Documents