1. ICBF Dairy Industry Meeting.
22nd November 2017

2. Agenda. New developments in dairy genetic/genomic evaluations.
Using Teams of Bulls.
Managing risk in your breeding program – presentation for next weeks Teagasc Dairy Conference.

3. Approach Taken. Technical review team established. Areas;
Implementation of Test Day Model.
New economic values.
Updating training population for genomic predictions.
New software for genomic predictions – same as current beef & calving.
New genomic evaluations for health & management traits.
Recommendation to proceed with changes.

4. What is causing most change?
Most of the change is from TDM & EV’s (~40% each). Focus of todays meeting.

5. EBI Economic value update 2017
Laurence Shalloo & Donagh Berry
Teagasc, Moorepark
ICBF Scientific Committee, Dublin airport, Oct 2017

6. Updates Incidence of lameness diseases
Processing Sector Model Application
Ratio
Price
Costs (e.g., labour)

7. Milk processor model Simulation model
Built with both an annual and a monthly time step model and can incorporate seasonal effects into the analysis
Developed in Microsoft Excel and is solved using Visual Basic
Mass balance model accounting for all inputs and outputs

8. Processing sector model schematic

9. 2013 OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2011-2020
FAPRI – ISU 2011 World Agricultural Outlook
USDA Agricultural Projections to 2020

10. 2013 - Price Projections - Powders
2013 Update
Milk Price cpl
Ratio of protein to fat 2.56 : 1
Fat value €2.8532
Protein value €7.3042
US $/ tonne

11. Process for 2017 milk price updates
Discussions with many of the Industry stakeholders;
Current Market Situation
Short term <1 Year
Long term –5 Years
Implement feed back in the Processing Sector Model and from there to the EBI

12. Outcomes for 2017 Product Price information sensitive
Implemented in the Model
Current
Price 35c/l
Ratio Protein to Fat (0.85 to 1) (I.e. Fat higher than Protein)
Short Term
Price 33c/l
Ratio of Protein to Fat (1.22 to 1)

13. Outcomes for 2017 Product Price information sensitive Long Term
Milk Price 30.7 c/l
Ratio of Protein to Fat (1.7 to 1)
Protein Value €5.231/Kg
Fat Value €3.131/kg

14. Costs Labour Costs: €12.44/hr  €15/hr
Vet costs: caesarean €235; call-out €90 (IFJ)
Heifer rearing costs also increase due to labour cost increase
€1,545/Heifer to €1,570
Other costs – No change in Outlook

15. Incidence HealthyGenes Proportionality of hoof ailments
UK data  Irish data

16. Results Correlation among proofs (n=4208) of 0.9986
Trait
2014
2017
Milk (kg)
-0.09
Fat (kg)
1.04
2.08
Protein (kg)
6.64
5.88
Calving interval (d)
-12.43
-12.59
Survival (%)
12.01
12.43
Calving difficulty dir (%)
-3.52
-4.19
Calving difficulty mat (%)
-1.73
-2.31
Gestation (d)
-7.50
-7.93
Calf mortality (%)
-2.58
Cow (kg)
-1.65
Carcase weight (kg)
1.38
Carcase conf
10.32
Carcase fat (units)
-11.71
Cull cow (kg)
0.15
Lameness (%)
-54.26
-72.47
Mastitis (%)
-77.10
-82.65
SCC (Loge)
-43.49
Milking duration (seconds)
-0.25
-0.31
Temperament (units)
33.69
35.86
Correlation among proofs (n=4208) of
Correlation among proofs of Active Sires (n=650) of 0.992
Upward shift in mean EBI value (+€10-€15), mainly due to milk price increase & fat kg.

17. Test Day Model - Background
Currently calculate 305 day values for each lactation
305 day model uses one 305 day figure for Milk/Fat/Protein which summarises whole lactation
Operated on contract by CRV Holland – only evaluation not run in-house by ICBF.
Current model - trait is Heifer-Equivalent (calving @26 months)
Test day model – each parity (1-3) is a different (but correlated) genetic trait. Separate breeding value for each parity(1-3)

18. Why Change? Current model has performed very well
More accurate estimation of environmental effects from including the influence of particular recording day
Optimal use of information from all test days
Better use of records in progress
Possibility of persistency evaluation
Method of choice for most dairy evaluations internationally (New Zealand, Holland, Nordic Countries, Canada, Germany, UK, Belgium)

19. Actions – Test Day Model
Genetic parameters estimated 2012 milk/fat/prot incl additional Heterogenous Variance parameters
Submit initial HO/FR evaluation to interbull test run Jan 2013 Milk/Fat/Prot - passed Interbull test
Submit all breed (HO/FR, Je, NR/SR, Sim) evaluation to interbull test run Sept 2013 – passed Interbull test
Dec 2013 – test proofs generated incl genomics
Milk/Prot proofs stack up well, Fat proofs stack up well overall – some queries
Decision – not made official due to queries on fat

20. Actions 2014 re-estimate parameters, full re-work of model
Submit milk/fat/prot to Interbull test run Sep 2014
Results – passed Interbull test
Decision – not to proceed

21. Actions Specific evaluation by CRV excluding HV correction
Apr Timo Pitkänen (LUKE) visit ICBF 4 months
Complete analysis of model
Results presented at ICBF industry meeting in July (basically same as previous presented but with 2 years more data)
Data submitted to Interbull Test run Sep 2017 – Pass.
Full TDM evaluation undertaken, including young GS bulls.

22. Data Individual test day records (i.e. raw milk recording)
Tests since 1/1/1996
Animals with known sire/dam
All parities up to 15
All parities presented => => weighted to an overall.
PARITY
Records
Cows 1
7,524,368
1,517,884 9
327,470
70,960 2
6,199,088
1,231,431 10
158,772
35,176 3
4,845,157
964,849 11
70,574
15,966 4
3,655,977
734,590 12
29,370
6,780 5
2,591,464
526,347 13
10,904
2,581 6
1,728,348
355,871 14
3,825
945 7
1,070,985
223,290 15
1,590
356 8
614,545
130,847

23. Correlations between old/new proofs
Num Anis
Milk
Fat
Prot
Bulls >90%
2258
0.966
0.970
0.956
Bulls >70%
3557
0.954
0.947
0.939
All Cows with records
0.924
0.935
0.923
Alive Cows with records
626774
0.958
0.953

24. Weighing by Parity - Arbitrary
Other Countries
Nordic Countries
50 : 30 : 20 UK
38 : 31 : 31
Holland
41 : 33 : 26
content/uploads/2016/03/E-7-milk-production.pdf
Records from last 6 years
PARITY
Num Records
Fraction
Weighting 1
970,737
41% 2
781,567
0.81
33% 3
611,521
0.63
26% 4
468,900
0.48
20% 5
339,935
0.35
14% 6
233,054
0.24
10% 7
148,637
0.15 6% 8
88,362
0.09 4% 9
48,495
0.05 2% 10
24,413
0.03 1% 11
11,519
0.01 0% 12
5,072 13
1,952
0.00 14
710 15
189
Base cow is unchanged
(born 2005, calved 2007)

25. Base cow production.
Base cow production = 6,044 Milk kg, Fat kg & 207 Protein kg (first 3 lactations => 70% of cow herd).
Bull A = +300 kg milk, +12 kg Fat, + 10 kg Protein.
Daughters = 6,344 milk, Fat kg & 217 Protein kg.
Move away from heifer equivalent => more robust, more in line with reality, in line with best practice.

26. Benefits of TDM – Bulls differences.
Example; YAD – increasing on new TDM vs YGD falling back.

27. Update Training Population.
These are the animals from which the genomic predictions are derived.
Important to update routinely.
For beef and calving, updated at each routine run.
Opportunity to add an additional ~1500 sires (AI sires and stock sires) => 7k total animals in training.
Females (including multi-breed) considered in 2018.

28. Point of note; Reliability.
No increase in reliability from new system/software.
New software calculates reliability more accurately than previous software (technically better).

29. Impact; Comparison of Current Official and New Test Proofs*
6 out of Top 10 bulls are still in Top 10 on New EBI
85 out of Top 100 bulls are still in Top 100 on New EBI
*Based on 886 Active AI Sires (Test proofs distributed yesterday).

30. Impact; Mean & SD changes by breeds for Active AI sires.

31. Impact; Genetic Trends.
Mean shift slight higher for more recent years => more variation in new proofs and impact of selecting better animals.

32. Summary.
A number of improvements have been applied to ICBF’s genetic/genomic evaluation systems;
In line with international practice (TDM).
Taking account of future value and costs at farm level (EV’s).
Ensuring a more robust system for genomic evaluations of milk/fertility (as per beef).
Slight upward shift in mean EBI (€20-30).
Little impact on overall rankings, even for Top 100 bulls (85 bulls still in top 100).

33. Next Steps.
Test proofs are based on August data. Not for publication or promotion.
Apply changes to new genetic evaluations (based on data up to November).
Official release date is 10 January.
Goal is to have dairy AI sires only published pre-Christmas.
Full proof run not possible (beef herdbooks, society sales, EBI reports, HerdPlus support etc).
Will keep industry informed on progress.

34. Reliability of genetic evaluations
Donagh Berry
Teagasc, Moorepark, Ireland
ICBF Industry Meeting, November 2017

35. EBI confidence interval

36. Basis of bull teams (risk minimisation)
2 bulls – UU UD DU DD (25% U, 50% no change, 25% D)
“unlucky” – 1/4 times (25%)
3 bulls (23) – UUU, DDD, UUD, UDU, DUU, DDU, DUD, UDD
“Unlucky” – 1/8 times (12.5%)
4 bulls (24) – UUUU, DDDD, UUUD, UDUU, DUUU……
“Unlucky” – 1/16 times (6.25%)
Probability more go up than down
50% if even number
Assumes independence between tosses/bulls
(and equal “usage”)

37. Unrelated bull team Average team reliability Example:
5 bulls, evenly used, each with a reliability of 50% (i.e., 0.5)
Team size

38. Unrelated bull team Average team reliability Assumes
Unrelated bulls (coin tosses)
Equal usage of bulls
5 bulls each 50% reliability with 99% of cows mated to one bull
Reliability ≈ 50%
50% << 90%
Team size

39. Unrelated 4-bull team (50% reliability)
Evenly used

40. Average team reliability
Unrelated bull team
Sire reliability
Average team reliability
Example:
4 bulls, evenly used, each with a reliability of 50% from the same sire of 50% reliability
Team size

41. Team size by herd size Larger herds have “more skin in the game”
Herd size bracket
Average herd size
Min number of bulls
1-50 25 7
51-100 75
125 8
175 10
225 11
275 12
325 13
375 14
Larger herds have “more skin in the game”
Risk if proportional to the extent of the variability

42. Conclusions Bull teams minimise the risk of all bulls falling
Team reliability to-date based on unrelated bulls
Similar to bulls from high reliability sire
Should take (reliability of) sire of bull team into consideration
Already encapsulated in single bull reliability
Can mix and match different team constructs

43. Minimising risk in the breeding season
Andrew Cromie & Kevin Downing

44. Overview Benefits of EBI at farm level
Managing risk in your breeding programme
Daughter proven bulls?
Teams of bulls?
HerdPlus Sire Advice tool?
EBI developments 2018
Questions & Answers
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

45. 2009. Establish Genomics; Rate of gain doubled
Rate of genetic gain in EBI (€/lact) for dairy females born in Ireland between
2020. Next Gen Herd
2009. Establish Genomics; Rate of gain doubled
2005. Establish G€N€ IR€
2002. Establish ICBF & EBI
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

46. © Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd. 2017

47. Next Gen Herd Fertility Performance 2013-2016
Elite
NatAv
Sig
Submission rate (%) 92 86
<0.05
Pregnancy rate first service (%) 60 46
<0.001
Pregnancy rate first 6 weeks (%) 73 58
Final pregnancy rate – 12 weeks (%) 81
Calving to conception interval (days) 76
No. of services
1.57
1.77
<0.01
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

48. Trend in herd performance 2010 – 2016
Based on 2,801 creamery suppliers with EBI, milk co-op and fertility data
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

49. Bull proofs will change!
Young GS Bull
Initial DP Bull
Well proven bull
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

50. Managing Risk - Use Proven Bulls
Yes, you will have bulls that are less likely to move, but they will be 3-4 years inferior in EBI + Profit
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

51. Managing Risk – Use of Bull Teams
Yes we use teams of bulls
But we majorly over-use individual bulls
- Especially relevant for heifers – herds using 1 or 2 bulls on heifers!
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

52. © Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd. 2017

53. Breeding Program Strategy
Equal use of bull teams.
High EBI Bulls

54. Herd Size (incl. Heifers)
Updated Bull Usage Guidelines
Herd Size (incl. Heifers)
Minimum Bull Team 7 8 10 11 12 14
New guidelines account for;
- relatedness of bull teams
- increase in reliability of bull team from 90% to 95%
- impact of herd size/industry
Minimum use targets & equal usage of bulls
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

55. Managing Risk - HerdPlus Sire Advice
Usage has been low - about 2,500 herds (~27% HerdPlus members).
HerdPlus Target - 4,000 herds in 2018
Need to make it more user friendly & accessible to a wider audience
Surveyed Farmers & Industry Partners
New version being developed – Release January 2018
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

56. Managing Risk - Sire Advice
What’s included in new version to help minimise risk
Minimum Bull pack reliability criteria – 95%
Usage of Bull Packs e.g. Fertility, High Production
Genomic Inbreeding
Avoidance of carrier matings
Other improvements include:
Crossbreeding option
Cater for contract reared animals
Allow for contract matings & beef matings
Mark cows for culling
Use of sliders to help select suitable bulls
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

57. 5. Save to AI Handheld / Breeding Chart
HerdPlus Sire Advice
1. Choose your females
2. Pick your Bulls
3. Decide on straw usage
4. Review your pack
5. Save to AI Handheld / Breeding Chart
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

58. 1. Female Selector Choose females for Selective Mating Culling Beef AI
Crossbreeding
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

59. Bull Selector Screen
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

60. EBI Developments 2018
Update of the economic values based on latest data from Teagasc
Increasing projected milk price by 1 cpl, from 29.7 to 30.7 cpl
Decreasing relative value of protein to reflect the higher value of fat
Increasing farm labour costs from €12.4/hour to €15/hour
Implementation of a Test Day Model for milk production traits
Replaces predicted 305-day yield – international best practice
More accurate for grass based system - can account for non-genetic effects specific to each test day, (e.g., weather, grass quality)
Overall impact of these changes is minimal
Average EBI of bulls on the ICBF Active Bull List expected to increase by approx. €30
Average correlation amongst Active AI sires is 0.97, with relatively little re-ranking amongst the high EBI sires on the ICBF Active Bull List.
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

61. Summary
Maximising profit from your breeding program is not just about EBI.
You need to also consider the RISK of proofs for individual bulls changing.
Using Daughter Proven bulls will reduce this risk (somewhat), but EBI and profit will be reduced as a result.
Instead, you should use teams of high EBI GS bulls equally on your herd.
For 100 cow herd, you need to use a minimum of 8 bulls evenly across your herd.
HerdPlus Sire Advice is key tool in managing risk.
New “Breeding Program” campaign being developed with Teagasc & AI industry for Spring 2018.
EBI and genomics will continue to evolve. This is also part of your risk management strategy.
© Irish Cattle Breeding Federation Soc. Ltd

62. New Breeding Program Strategy.
High EBI Bulls
Equal use of bull teams.