H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA San Antonio (1) 2008 AIPL Report: We’re from the government and we’re here to help you!

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (2) Trend in days open Lactation

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (3) Cow fertility trends Year bred Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-d NRR for 1st service (%) 1st service CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) HolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJersey

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (4) Cow fertility trends Year bred Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-d NRR for 1st service (%) 1st service CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) HolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJersey ……

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (5) Cow fertility trends Year bred Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-d NRR for 1st service (%) 1st service CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) HolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJersey …………

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (6) Cow fertility trends Year bred Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-d NRR for 1st service (%) 1st service CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) HolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJerseyHolsteinJersey ………………

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (7) Holstein NRR (2005 breedings) Parity 70-day NRR (%) 1st service 2nd service 3rd service 4th service 5th service >

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (8) Holstein CR (2005 breedings) Parity CR (%) 1st service 2nd service 3rd service 4th service 5th service >

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (9) Herds with synchronized breeding Synchroni- zation status Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-day NRR for 1st service (%) CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) Preg- nancy rate (%) None Possible Probable Synchronized

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (10) US regions

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (11) Holstein regional averages (2005 breedings) Region Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-day NRR for 1st service (%) CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) Mideast92 Midwest86 Mountain93 Northeast85 Northwest76 Southeast89 Southwest73

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (12) Holstein regional averages (2005 breedings) Region Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-day NRR for 1st service (%) CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) Mideast9247 Midwest8646 Mountain9348 Northeast8546 Northwest7642 Southeast8944 Southwest7336

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (13) Holstein regional averages (2005 breedings) Region Calving to 1st breeding (d) 70-day NRR for 1st service (%) CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) Mideast Midwest Mountain Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest733627

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (14) Holstein regional averages (2005 breedings) Region Calving to 1st breedin g (d) 70-day NRR for 1st service (%) CR (%) Services per lactation (no.) Mideast Midwest Mountain Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (15) Benefits of improved reproduction l Lowers your semen cost l Optimizes cows lifetime yields l Reduced culling due to delayed or failed conception, i.e. less need for herd replacements l Provides more herd replacements

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (16) Two tall tales l Reproduction is only a management issue l Genetics cannot help solve fertility problems

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (17) Reproductive evaluations l Fertility of bull as a service sire l Fertility of bulls’ daughters when they reach breeding age

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (18) Bull fertility evaluations l Estimated Relative Conception Rate (ERCR) w 70-day nonreturn rate (NRR) Source: − DRMS (Raleigh, NC), 1986−2005 − USDA (Beltsville, MD), 2006−present l Western Bull Fertility Analysis w 75-d veterinary-confirmed conception rate w Source: AgriTech (Visalia, CA), 2003 −present

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (19) ERCR distribution (Aug. 2007)

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (20) New service sire evaluation coming l Based on conception rate rather than NRR l More accurate w Inseminations from most of the United States w All services (not just first) w Additional model effects included l Available in late Spring/Summer 2008

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (21) Pregnancy rate (PR) l Percentage of open cows between 50 and 250 days in milk that become pregnant during each 21-day period l Advantages over days open (DO), the days from calving to conception w Easily defined w Information from nonpregnant cows included w Larger values preferable

H.D. Norman 2007 NDHIA San Antonio Convention (22) Pregnancy rate (PR) l PR = [21/(DO − voluntary waiting period + 11)]100 w Voluntary waiting period assumed to be 60 days w Factor of +11 adjusts to middle day of 21-day cycle l Examples w Herd with average of 70 DO has PR of 100% w Herd with average of 91 DO has PR of 50% w Herd with average of 133 DO has PR of 25% w Herd with average of 154 DO has PR of 20%

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (23) USDA pregnancy rate l Linear approximation l PR = 0.25 (233 − DO) l 1% higher PR = 4 days fewer open

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (24) Reproductive evaluations l Fertility of bulls’ daughters when they reach breeding age

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (25) Daughter pregnancy rate (DPR) l First USDA genetic evaluations in 2003 l Same across-breed animal model as for yield traits, productive life (PL), and somatic cell score (SCS) l Heritability of 4%

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (26) DPR ( continued) l Predicted transmitting abilities (PTAs) reported as percentages w Daughters of bull with PTA DPR of 1 expected to be 1% more likely to become pregnant during estrous cycle than if bull had PTA DPR of 0 w Each increase of 1% in PTA DPR equals a decrease of 4 days in PTA DO l PTA DO approximated by −4 × PTA DPR l Example: Bull with PTA DPR of +2.0 would have PTA DO of −8

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (27) Current breed averages BreedPR (%)DO (d) Gestation length (d) Calving interval (d) Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Holstein Jersey Milking Shorthorn

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (28) DPR trend (August 2007 base)

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (29) Bull PTA DPR frequency (Aug. 2007)

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (30) Lifetime merit indexes TraitUnits Relative value (%) Net merit Cheese merit Fluid merit ProteinPounds23280 FatPounds MilkPounds0−1224 PLMonths SCSLog−9−7−9 UdderComposite656 Feet/legsComposite333 Body sizeComposite−4−3−4 DPRPercent978 Calving abilityDollars646

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (31) Lifetime value l Factors in determining economic value to DPR w Loss of about $1.50/DO w 2.8 lactations per cow w No breedings for half of cows during final lactation w Correlation of heifer and cow fertility (0.3) w Value of extra calves w Other unmeasured health expenses l Total lifetime merit value of $21/PTA DPR unit

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (32) Genetic merit of high-DPR Holstein bulls Trait All active AI bulls Bulls (no.)684 PTA milk (lb)838 PTA fat (lb)32 PTA protein (lb)25 PTA SCS2.94 PTA PL (mo)1.1 PTA DPR (%)−0.4 PTA DO (derived)1.6 Net merit ($)242 Semen price ($/unit)24

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (33) Genetic merit of high-DPR Holstein bulls Trait All active AI bulls Active AI bulls with PTA DPR of ≥2.0 % Bulls (no.)68441 PTA milk (lb) PTA fat (lb)3214 PTA protein (lb)2517 PTA SCS PTA PL (mo) PTA DPR (%)− PTA DO (derived)1.6−10.0 Net merit ($) Semen price ($/unit)2425

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (34) Genetic merit of high-DPR Holstein bulls Trait All active AI bulls Active AI bulls with PTA DPR of ≥2.0 % Top 50% of active AI bulls based on lifetime net merit (>$245) Bulls (no.) PTA milk (lb) ,125 PTA fat (lb) PTA protein (lb) PTA SCS PTA PL (mo) PTA DPR (%)−0.42.5−0.1 PTA DO (derived)1.6− Net merit ($) Semen price ($/unit)2425

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (35) Genetic merit of high-DPR Holstein bulls Trait All active AI bulls Active AI bulls with PTA DPR of ≥2.0 % Top 50% of active AI bulls based on lifetime net merit (>$245) Top 50% of active AI bulls based on net merit with PTA DPR of ≥2.0% Bulls (no.) PTA milk (lb) , PTA fat (lb) PTA protein (lb) PTA SCS PTA PL (mo) PTA DPR (%)−0.42.5− PTA DO (derived)1.6− −10.4 Net merit ($) Semen price ($/unit)

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (36) What if I follow the Recommendations… l Question: What happens if folks selects for one of those fitness traits we provide? l Issue: Before 1994 there was an academic discussion on what happens if we lower the SCS too much, and then cows have to face a mastitis challenge? l We proceeded providing PTA SCS and built it into Net Merit so theoretically there is potential for this issue to still be questioned!

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (37) Research the potential problem l Using field data less costly; using research herds would be expensive l Group all AI Holstein bulls with 35 or more daughters into 5 equal groups based on PTA SCS l Look at data across 2 generations (sire and maternal grandsire (MGS))

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (38) Mean daughter 1 st lactation age-adjusted SCS by sire-mgs PTA SCS group Sire PTA SCS MGS PTA SCS ≤ to to to 3.13≥3.1 Age-adjusted SCS ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (39) Productive life mean (mo) by sire-mgs PTA SCS group Sire PTA SCS MGS PTA SCS ≤ to to to 3.13≥3.1 PL (mo) ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (40) Productive life deviation (mo) by sire-mgs PTA SCS group Sire PTA SCS MGS PTA SCS ≤ to to to 3.13≥3.1 PL (mo) ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (41) Percent of cows culled for mastitis by sire- mgs PTA SCS group Sire PTA SCS MGS PTA SCS ≤ to to to 3.13≥3.14 (% culled) ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (42) Productive life mean (mo) by sire-mgs PTA DPR group Sire PTA DPR MGS PTA DPR ≤ to to to 1.1≥1.2 PL (mo) ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (43) Productive life deviation (mo) by sire-mgs PTA DPR group Sire PTA DPR MGS PTA DPR ≤ to to to 1.1≥1.2 PL (mo) ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (44) Percent of cows culled for reproductive reasons by sire-mgs PTA DPR group Sire PTA DPR MGS PTA DPR ≤ to to to 1.1≥1.2 (% culled) ≤ to to to ≥

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (45) H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (45) Conclusions

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (46) Recommendations to breeders l Usual recommendation: Don’t select bulls solely on one trait because many traits have economic value l Consider economic value of all performance traits in your own market when making genetic choices l Dairies with seasonal calving should find an index that puts more weight on daughter fertility than those recommended for the general industry

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (47) Selection for bull fertility l Breeding to bulls with higher conception rates returns a profit fairly quickly w Premium of $2 could be paid for semen per 1% improvement in fertility w Thus, a unit of semen from bull with ERCR of +2 is worth $8 more than a unit from bull with ERCR of −2 l Use bull fertility as a secondary selection trait after picking bulls on their economic indexes

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (48) Selection for cow fertility l Selection for improved fertility will pay off, even though the benefit is delayed for 3 years l Choose your sires based on lifetime economic merit that includes daughter fertility, rather than for daughter fertility alone l However, producers with herd fertility problems could emphasize DPR extensively with little loss in overall net merit

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (49) Fertility emphasis l Service-sire fertility and DPR especially important for grazing herds with seasonal calving l Use of a few bulls that average 3.0% for PTA DPR (equivalent to a decrease of 12 DO) could neutralize much of genetic decline in fertility from use of high-yield bulls for 40 years l Select for overall merit based on genetic- economic index appropriate for your situation

H.D. Norman 2008 NDHIA San Antonio (50) Thank you!