Trends in Noncompliance with Milk Quality Standards for Dairy Herd Improvement Herds in the United States H. D. Norman*, J. R. Wright Animal Improvement.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Safeguarding Animal Health Current levels of compliance with EU bulk- tank SCC standards and proposed (but rejected) US standards based on data from four.

Advertisements

Factors affecting milk ELISA scores of cows tested for Johne’s disease H. D. Norman 1, J. R. Wright 1 *, and T. M. Byrem 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs.

Relationship of somatic cell score with fertility measures Poster 1390 ADSA 2001, Indiannapolis R. H. Miller 1, J. S. Clay 2, and H. D. Norman 1 1 Animal.

2004 H.D. Norman, A.H. Sanders,* R.H. Miller, and R.L. Powell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricutural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD.

2002 Paul M. VanRaden and Ashley H. Sanders Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

John B. Cole* and Paul M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

Impact of selection for increased daughter fertility on productive life and culling for reproduction H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright*, R. H. Miller Animal Improvement.

The Israeli Dairy Industry

Investigating Herd Mastitis Problems Dave Wolfgang Bhushan Jayarao Ernest Hovingh Department of Veterinary & Biomedical Sciences Penn State University.

Use of cow culling to help meet compliance for somatic cell standards H. D. Norman and J. R. Wright * Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural.

ADSA 2002 (HDN-P1) 2002 Comparison of occurrence and yields of daughters of progeny-test and proven bulls in artificial insemination and natural- service.

2012 ADSA-AMPA-ASAS-CSAS-WSASAS joint annual meeting (1)Norman Comparison of daughter performance of New Zealand and North American sires in US herds H.D.

Derivation of Factors to Estimate Daily Fat, Protein, and Somatic Cell Score from One Milking of Cows Milked Three Times Daily M. M. Schutz* 1 and H. D.

India Emerging Markets Conference, May 2009 (1) Leigh Walton Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,

2001 ADSA annual meeting, July 2001 (1) Timeliness of progeny-testing through AI and percentage of bulls returned to service (abstract 1020) H.D. NORMAN,*

2003 Clone risk assessment workshop (HDN-1) Performance of dairy cattle clones and evaluation of their milk composition H. Duane Norman*,1 and Marie K.

2002 7WCGALP (HDN-1) Performance of Holstein clones in the United States H.D. NORMAN,*,1 T.J. LAWLOR, 2 and J.R. WRIGHT 1 1 Animal Improvement Programs.

George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD National Association.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD NDHIA –

 PTA mobility was highly correlated with udder composite.  PTA mobility showed a moderate, positive correlation with production, productive life, and.

Performance of Holsteins that originated from embryo transfer or twin births H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright* and R.L. Powell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory,

NAAB Dairy Trade Mission (1) A.H. Sanders 2002 Ashley H. Sanders AIPL on the Web Accessing Data and aipl.arsusda.gov Animal Improvement Programs.

Comparison of Holstein service-sire fertility for heifer and cow breedings with conventional and sexed semen H. D. Norman*, J. L. Hutchison, and P. M.

2002 ADSA 2002 (HDN-1) H.D. NORMAN* ( ), R.H. MILLER, P.M. V AN RADEN, and J.R. WRIGHT Animal Improvement Programs.

Norway (1) 2005 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service,

Assessment of voluntary waiting period and frequency of estrus synchronization among herds R.H. Miller, 1, * H.D. Norman, 1 M.T. Kuhn, 1 and J.S. Clay.

AFGC Convention 2004 (1) 2004 Possibilities for Improving Dairy Cattle Performance Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.

REGRESSION MODEL y ijklm = BD i + b j A j + HYS k + b dstate D l + b sstate S l + b sd (S×SD m ) + b dherd F m + b sherd G m + e ijklm, y = ME milk yield,

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Missouri Dairy Summit.

Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2004 Genetic Base and Trait Definition Update.

2002 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD USDA Dairy Goat.

2007 J.B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Overview.

Genetic Evaluation of Lactation Persistency Estimated by Best Prediction for Ayrshire, Brown Swiss, Guernsey, and Milking Shorthorn Dairy Cattle J. B.

2001 NAAB DSEC, April 2002 (1) Revision and Use of Termination Codes PAUL VANRADEN Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service,

Factors affecting heifer fertility in U.S. Holsteins M. T. Kuhn* and J. L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service,

Effect of temperature and humidity on gestation length H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright,* and J.B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.

Accuracy of reported births and calving dates of dairy cattle in the United States Poster 1705 ADSA 2001, Indiannapolis H. D. Norman *,1, J. L. Edwards,

Factors that affect abortion frequency in dairy herds in the United States R.H. Miller,* M.T. Kuhn, H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright Animal Improvement Programs.

A.H. Sanders 2002 AIPL on the Web Accessing Data and aipl.arsusda.gov Ashley H. Sanders Ashley H. Sanders Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory.

John B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Best prediction.

2006 Mid-Atlantic Dairy Grazing Conference, 2006 (1) Is There a Need for Different Genetics in Dairy Grazing Systems? H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L.

J. B. Cole 1,*, P. M. VanRaden 1, and C. M. B. Dematawewa 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,

XX International Grassland Conference 2005 (1) 2005 Genetic Alternatives for Dairy Producers who Practise Grazing H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L. Powell.

Dr. George R. Wiggans, Ph.D. Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD, USA

Factors affecting death rate of lactating cows in Dairy Herd Improvement herds R. H. Miller, H. Duane Norman, M. T. Kuhn* and J. R. Wright Animal Improvement.

Norman, 2014ICAR / Interbull annual meeting, Berlin, Germany, May 20, 2014 (1) Dr. H. Duane Norman Interim Administrator Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding.

H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright, and R.H. Miller Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA

WiggansARS Big Data Computing Workshop (1) 2013 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,

2007 John B. Cole USDA Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2008 Data Collection Ratings and Best Prediction.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA 2009 meeting.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD , USA EAAP.

Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA Board – 2009 (1)

Minimum Dry Period Length to Maximize Performance M. T. Kuhn*, J. L. Hutchison, and H. D. Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.

Multi-trait, multi-breed conception rate evaluations P. M. VanRaden 1, J. R. Wright 1 *, C. Sun 2, J. L. Hutchison 1 and M. E. Tooker 1 1 Animal Genomics.

ADSA 2002 (RHM-P1) 2002 R.H. Miller, ,1 H.D. Norman, 1 and J.S. Clay 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA,

Ashley H. Sanders and H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

H.D. Norman* J.R. Wright, P.M. VanRaden, and M.T. Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.

H. D. Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD DRMS annual.

Effects of dam’s dry period length on heifer development H. D. Norman and J. L. Hutchison* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.

2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (1) Heterosis and Breed Differences for Yield and Somatic Cell Scores of US Dairy Cattle in the 1990’s. PAUL VANRADEN Animal.

Characteristics of milk ELISA results for Johne’s disease in US dairy cows Byrem, T. M. 1 *, H. D. Norman 2 and J. R. Wright 2 1 Antel BioSystems, Lansing,

CRI – Spanish update (1) 2010 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.

2006 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production (1) Trait Selection When Culling U.S. Holsteins H.D. Norman, J.L. Hutchison, J.R. Wright,

H.D. NORMAN,* R.L. POWELL, J.R. WRIGHT

Abstr. M65 Test-day milk loss associated with elevated test-day somatic cell score R.H. Miller, H.D. Norman, G.R. Wiggans, and J.R. Wright Animal Improvement.

Effectiveness of genetic evaluations in predicting daughter performance in individual herds H. D. Norman 1, J. R. Wright 1*, C. D. Dechow 2 and R. C.

Reproductive trends of dairy herds in the United States

3Canadian Dairy Network, Guelph, ON Canada

Relationship of gestation length to stillbirth

E. Hare,*H.D. Norman, and J.R. Wright

Presentation transcript:

Trends in Noncompliance with Milk Quality Standards for Dairy Herd Improvement Herds in the United States H. D. Norman*, J. R. Wright Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD INTRODUCTION  Most countries have an upper limit for somatic cell count (SCC) because it is considered an indicator of milk quality.  The current US SCC limit remains at 750,000 cells/mL; however the European Union (EU) standard (400,000 cells/mL) is being imposed on many herds exporting dairy products to Europe.  Several US states already have, or are in the process of lowering their SCC limits below the national standard (CA, ID, MT, NV, OR, WA).  Examine the trend in frequency of herd noncompliance for SCC based on current and alternative standards OBJECTIVE DATA & METHODS DATA:  Approximately 95% of Dairy Herd Improvement (DHI) herds are enrolled in somatic cell score (SCS) testing  Used monthly test day SCS from herds enrolled in DHI programs for three 12-mo periods: November 2009 to October 2010, November 2010 to October 2011, and November 2011 to October 2012  Each cow SCS converted to SCC: SCC = 2 (SCS-3) (100,000)  Individual cow SCC weighted by her test day milk yield to produce test-day SCC for the herd EDITS:  ≥ 10 cows for all test days  15 to 26 tests in each 12-mo period  Noncompliance was calculated for SCC levels of 750,000, 500,000 and 400,000 cells/mL for both US and EU methods RESULTS (cont.) RESULTS RESULTS (cont.) US DHI Test Day SCC (All Breeds) Percentage of US DHI herd-tests noncompliant by SCC level US method (frequency) EU method (geometric) (1000’s of cells/mL) Nov 2009-Oct Nov 2010-Oct Nov 2011-Oct US method (frequency) EU method (geometric) (1000’s of cells/mL) Nov 2009-Oct Nov 2010-Oct < Nov 2011-Oct < Percentage of milk supplied by US DHI herds noncompliant by SCC level US method (frequency) EU method (geometric) (1000’s of cells/mL) Herd size Number of herds , , < , < ≥ All herds ,855 <5% 5.0 to 9.9% 10.0 to 24.9% 25.0 to 50.0% November 2009-October 2010November 2010-October 2011November 2011-October 2012 Percentage of herd-tests noncompliant using current EU SCC standard (400,000 cells/mL) by state US versus EU SCC monitoring Program characteristicUSEU SCC sampleIndividual farm Bulk tank (BT)- SCC limit 750,000 cells/mL400,000 cells/mL Value usedConsecutive monthly BT-SCC Geometric mean of 3-mo BT-SCC Producer suspension 3 of 5 consecutive samples over limit 4 consecutive 3-mo means over limit  Geometric mean is mathematically lower than arithmetic mean  The EU 3-mo mean uses a single reference for the period, which allows a herd more time to reduce SCC before becoming noncompliant Percentage of herd-tests noncompliant by year and month using current EU SCC standard (400,000 cells/mL ) SCC (1000s) Year Percentage of US DHI herd-tests noncompliant November 2011 to October 2012 by herd size and SCC level TH