North America
Europe
Latin America
Asia Pacific
Africa
Middle East
We are dedicated to working alongside producers in order to optimize the well-being and performance of animals, unleashing their true genetic potential through nutrition.
Being a part of the Alltech Young Scientist (AYS) program has been an incredible and unforgettable experience.
I first got involved in research as an undergraduate studying food science and biochemistry, focusing on developing new analytical techniques for detecting antibiotics and other banned substances in food products. When my advisor suggested last year that I should submit my research paper to the competition, I never could have imagined what would come of it. The whole experience has been an amazing ride, and I know that it has had an enormous impact on all of the participants.
I couldn’t believe my eyes when I first saw that I had been selected as a regional undergraduate finalist — it was a great honor to represent North America, and I looked forward to presenting my research and meeting the other regional finalists.
When the global competition came, I headed to Kentucky with great anticipation. Meeting the incredibly talented scientists in the competition and learning about their areas of research could not have been more rewarding, and we all got an exciting up-close look at the innovative work that Alltech does to improve our agricultural systems.
Winning the global competition was a once-in-a-lifetime experience that I will never forget. My time spent with the Alltech Young Scientist program has had an incalculable impact on my future plans and inspired me to work harder to help solve the problems that we face as a society. I am looking forward to beginning my Ph.D. studies, and I hope to continue working on the development of new methods to keep our food supply safe from contamination. I am deeply grateful for Alltech’s support in helping to achieve this very important goal.
In closing, I would wholeheartedly encourage all who are interested to apply to the Alltech Young Scientist program. Getting the opportunity to participate in an international event such as this, and being able to expose yourself to groundbreaking ideas and different perspectives, is as valuable an experience as any that a student pursuing a future in agricultural science could get. Take the chance and apply — it could be the best decision you ever make!
<p>
Joshua Gukowsky of the University of Massachusetts Amherst was the North America undergraduate finalist for the Alltech Young Scientist Competition 2017.
</p>
The following is an edited transcript of Tom Martin’s interview with Dr. Vaughn Holder, research project manager for beef at Alltech.
Click below to hear the full interview:
Tom: We’re talking with Dr. Vaughn Holder, research project manager at Alltech, where he leads the global nutritional research on beef cattle. Thank you for joining us, Dr. Holder.
Vaughn: Thank you.
Tom: How does a producer take a “head-out-of-the-sand” approach?
Vaughn: The idea behind the “head-out-of-the-sand” approach is that we want producers to identify the opportunities that they have available to them.
There is significant social pressure these days. People want certain agricultural species to change the way they’re doing things. I think oftentimes consumers don’t necessarily understand the way producers are operating or that they’re already doing those things.
A “head-out-of-the-sand” approach is a way of saying to the producers, “Let’s take the good in what you do and let’s get you paid for it.”
Tom: How can a producer bring unique, traceable and healthy beef to the world marketplace?
Vaughn: Beef producers are actually very good environmental stewards. We’ve been producing beef from the land for several hundred years, and beef is still a viable product today.
What traceability does — or what verification does — is allows producers to market it as a part of their programs. This all starts with age and source verification, which is easy for most farmers who take records. It’s just being able to tell when the animal was born and where it comes from.
Tom: What are the key industry resources that allow a producer to, as you say, "steak" their claim?
Vaughn: “Steak" their claim — that’s great. You need two things: First, you need to have someone who can verify what you’re doing and that it fits into a certain program. Whether we’re talking about age and source verification or non-hormone treated cattle, you need somebody to come in and verify or certify that that’s what you’re doing.
Secondly, you may need to use some technologies if you are looking at replacing either antibiotics or hormones, or whatever it might be. There may be some minor modifications that you must make in your production system, and you may need some technologies to help you do that. That’s where Alltech comes in.
Tom: Why is there a need to rethink the process of taking beef products to the marketplace?
Vaughn: Most of this has been driven by social pressures — by consumer pressures — or by retail pressures. Basically, what happens is there are requirements from our consumers for certain types of production processes — or for the absence of certain production processes. When we are in business, we need to satisfy our customers’ needs, and that’s where most of this is coming from.
Tom: In your view, how could the disruptive technology CRISPR impact beef production?
Vaughn: The impacts of CRISPR are probably beyond what someone could tell you. To give you an example, if we look at polled dairy cows — “polled” meaning dairy cows without horns — if we had to go through the process of using breeding technologies to remove the horns from dairy cattle, it would probably take a process of about 10 years. It would take another 10 years to get the milk production of the dairy cows back to where they were. CRISPR would allow us to do that in a single generation.
Essentially, what CRISPR does is it allows you to edit genetics on the fly; to edit the gene sequence of the animal on the fly. That has connotations well beyond even what we can imagine in agriculture. You can imagine the consequences for medicine, for example.
Tom: You were involved in the 2016 launch of EPNIX®, Alltech’s program designed to improve the health and profitability of beef feedlot cattle independent of the use of antibiotics or other pharmaceutical technologies. Though, it does work both with and without antibiotics. Can you provide a bit more detail on the program?
Vaughn: Sure. EPNIX was a program that was developed through our nutrigenomics and epigenetics laboratory at Alltech. We have those programs in multiple species. However, the nutrition program in beef has probably seen the most progress commercially.
The culmination of that research — probably about 11 years’ worth of research — has resulted in EPNIX, which is essentially just a program designed to improve the health and performance of feedlot cattle, regardless of the use of other technologies. And that’s important; we are not replacing those technologies. We’re not talking about another antibiotic or another hormone. EPNIX products work by a completely different mechanism than those technologies. So, they do work in every situation.
Tom: How is EPNIX being received in the industry?
Vaughn: We’ve had a lot of good response from this. Agriculture is a very conservative industry. It’s actually very difficult to gain ground with folks in that industry because they are naturally suspicious of people trying to sell them all the latest and greatest technology. However, we partnered with one of the preeminent feeding groups in the industry and one of the most trusted research institutions in the industry: Cactus Feeders. They perform their own internal research for their own purposes. They are wholly owned by themselves and do not consult for anyone else. The research is taken very seriously.
We chose the right partner, and that’s why we chose to do the endpoint commercial research on the program. We had validated it in the laboratory, but we needed a place that could be trusted to show what the program can do commercially. That’s what has led to EPNIX being broadly accepted by the industry.
Tom: Are you seeing significant results?
Vaughn: Yes. In fact, from the two experiments that we have completed at Cactus Feeders thus far, we were able to improve the production of the cattle above and beyond what they are already doing. That’s important because I think it can be easy to set up a control group to fail otherwise. You need to compare new results to their current best. You need to be able to show that you can do better if you want any kind of mainstream adoption. In successive trials at Cactus Feeders, whether antibiotics were used or not, this program has improved the bottom line of those cattle.
Tom: What important future challenges does the industry face?
Vaughn: There are several. I think most of them pertain to the massive use of many technologies that the industry has grown accustomed to or has grown to rely on. The use of in-feed antibiotics is under a lot of scrutiny right now. I think it scares a lot of people — the thought that they might lose the use of those antibiotics, or as a worst-case scenario, that we might lose antibiotics altogether. I think it’s very bad if we end up in a situation where we can’t treat sick animals. That will not be good for the industry.
Tom: How does your work affect the average consumer in their kitchen table?
Vaughn: That is a very good question. The initial work that was done on the nutrition program was an effort to improve the quality of the meat. Now, it is quite difficult to implement when the beef industry is segmented. You have different entities involved in different parts of the production of meat. It becomes difficult to get one partner to pay for something that another partner will benefit from.
It has always been difficult to implement technologies that improve the quality of meat. However, because this program was based on improving quality initially, and now that we also have the health and performance aspect attached to it, we’ve seen that we can carry that benefit through. The main point of that is getting meat that has a longer shelf life and enriched micronutrient concentrations. You also get meat that is juicier and retains water better.
Tom: What do you enjoy most about your work?
Vaughn: I enjoy the act of taking something from a theoretical standpoint — from the laboratory standpoint — and coming up with an idea and seeing it applied out in the world one day. That’s the most satisfying part of the job for me. I think it can be frustrating to many scientists that you sit in the laboratory and do this amazing work, but if it doesn’t have an actual impact on the world, at the end of the day, it can become quite frustrating. So, to see this fed to real animals in real life and end up on people’s tables is quite satisfying.
Tom: Dr. Vaughn Holder, research project manager at Alltech. Thank you for joining us.
Vaughn: Thanks.
Dr. Vaughn Holder spoke at ONE: The Alltech Ideas Conference (ONE17). To hear more talks from the conference, sign up for the Alltech Idea Lab.
As consumer demands evolve, producers should consider a new approach to taking healthy, traceable beef to the marketplace.
How do you prefer your salmon: wild-caught or farm-raised?
When that question came up in dinner conversations 20 years ago, the answer likely would have revealed skepticism about farmed fish.
In those days, the industry was new. Salmon farms were being accused of polluting the oceans. Some were found to be harboring and incubating disease, turning a blind eye to infected escapees, and wiping out forage fish, up to 7 pounds of which once went into each pound of farmed Atlantic salmon.
But those negatives did nothing to dampen a growing world population’s appetite for fish. Seventeen percent of the protein people eat already comes from the sea, and demand is set to rise by 40 percent by 2050, according to the Norwegian Seafood Council.
“The consumption of salmon has tripled over the past 15 years,” said Keith Filer, research coordinator for aquaculture at Alltech. “The increased consumption would not be possible by relying on wild-caught salmon. Farmed-raised salmon is the only option for supplying the increase in demand.”
Still, it’s not unusual to encounter lingering debate and a host of misperceptions over wild-caught versus farmed salmon. And in this era of the smart device with details about our foods accessible at our fingertips, there has been commensurate pressure from consumer and wildlife advocates to reform aquaculture.
“Salmon farmers did a funny thing,” wrote The Washington Post contributor Tamar Haspel. “They listened. The survival of the industry depended on farmers cleaning up their act, and so that’s what they started to do.”
That has included an effort to boost consumer confidence and demonstrate a commitment to the environment through independent, third-party certification.
“The best-regarded of the certification programs will require record keeping, disclosure and transparency so the public can know that the fish they choose has been secured with care,” said Contessa Kellogg-Winters, communications director at the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC).
The ASC has developed certification based on industry standards that address the adverse impacts associated with aquaculture. Thousands of NGOs, scientists, academics, farmers and industry experts contributed to the process.
According to Kellogg-Winters, the ASC standards:
These standards not only raise the bar on the quality of production, but also serve to combat misperceptions about farmed salmon. Here are some of the more persistent among them:
“An important misperception that I have come across is the use of growth hormones and antibiotics in feeds for farmed salmon,” said Gijs Rutjes, technical sales support manager at the fish feed producer Alltech Coppens. “This is not true for the growth hormones. Antibiotics are only used as a last resort in salmon farming to cure a potentially dangerous bacterial disease but never to prevent diseases or to get performance benefit. Just like we would go to the doctor when we are seriously ill.”
Concerns that fish are farmed in dirty water and crowded conditions linger. The industry, however, has developed a better understanding of regional capacity — the total number of farmed fish an area can support, according to the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch. The result has been a decline in pollution as farms allow areas to recover before fish are replaced there.
Fish farmers “choose suitable sites for cage farming where the conditions and water quality are optimal,” said Rutjes. “They use feeds that keep the fish healthy and that ensure good growth. Nets are cleaned regularly to make sure sufficient water flow is there and to keep oxygen levels optimal. The salmon are kept at rather low densities, and they have spacious net cages that provide ample possibilities for natural behavior.”
Marine Harvest's salmon net cages in Norway.
For example, to prevent overcrowding, Norwegian law requires that salmon make up less than 2.5 percent of the pen’s volume. Each pen is made up of 97.5 percent water to allow for maximum comfort and a healthy growth cycle.
Salmon farms, he said, have been moving production to land-based recirculation aquaculture systems (RAS). These closed systems have no escapees, and the feces are collected and removed.
Salmon raised indoors at Marine Harvest in Norway.
Rutjes added that it’s in the fish farmer’s best interests to maintain a clean operation.
“A salmon farmer cares about his fish and knows the better he looks after them, the better the growth and flesh quality,” he explained.
Among lingering misconceptions is that a feed conversion rate of as much as 7 pounds of forage fish is needed to grow 1 pound of farmed salmon.
“The salmon industry has worked for many years to reduce the use of marine products in diets,” said Filer. “The feed conversion ratio for the industry has been reduced to as little as 1.6 to 1. The marine species that are used are not ones that are consumed by humans, and the major fish meal producers are much better at restricting the amount of fish harvested on a yearly basis.”
Alltech Coppens has yielded several new algae-based products that help reduce dependence on forage fish. These include the sustainable fish oil replacer ForPlus, an algae-derived fish oil substitute containing very high levels of DHA, which has been found to help reduce risk factors for heart diseases like high cholesterol and high blood pressure.
According to Kellogg-Winters, a side-by-side comparison of the resources and emissions it takes to produce salmon, chicken, pork, beef and lamb has shown salmon to be the most environmentally friendly of the group.
“Salmon convert more of what they are fed into consumable protein for the end user and require fewer resources for their feed,” she explained. “Pound for pound, salmon farming produces less waste — and requires fewer raw materials — to produce more of the food our growing global population needs.”
A Lerøy Seafood Group employee fillets farmed salmon raised in Norway.
Another concern voiced by consumers is the notion that farmed salmon get their pink color from artificial injections. Kiara Vallier, a writer for the submersible vehicle manufacturer Deep Trekker, notes, “Both wild and farmed salmon get their pink color from a carotenoid antioxidant in their diet called astaxanthin, which is traditionally produced by algae that wild salmon consume. Generally, farmed salmon are fed a diet that contains a chemically synthesized astaxanthin, so they get their color from the same antioxidant as their wild counterparts.”
Meanwhile, at the dinner table, how does wild-caught salmon differ in taste and texture from the farmed variety? Which is best?
To find out, The Washington Post assembled a panel of noted Washington seafood chefs and a seafood wholesaler for a blind taste test. They included Scott Drewno, executive chef of The Source by Wolfgang Puck; chef-restaurateur Kaz Okochi (Kaz Sushi Bistro, Masa 14); chef-restaurateur Bob Kinkead (Ancora); Bonnie S. Benwick, Tim Carman and Jane Touzalin of The Washington Post; and John Rorapaugh, director of sustainable initiatives at ProFish.
The fish, in order of panel preference (rated 1–10, with 10 being the highest score):
1. Costco farmed Atlantic, frozen in 4 percent salt solution, from Norway; $6 per pound (7.6 out of 10)
2. Trader Joe’s farmed Atlantic, from Norway; $10.99 per pound (6.4)
3. Loch Duart farmed Atlantic, from Scotland; $15 to $18 per pound (6.1)
4. Verlasso farmed Atlantic, from Chile; $12 to $15 per pound (6)
5. Whole Foods farmed Atlantic salmon, from Scotland; $14.99 per pound (5.6)
6. ProFish wild king (netted), from Willapa Bay, Washington; $16 to $20 per pound (5.3)
7. AquaChile farmed Atlantic, from Chile; $12 to $15 per pound (4.9)
8. ProFish wild coho (trolled), from Alaska; $16 to $20 per pound (4.4)
9. ProFish wild king (trolled), from Willapa Bay, Washington; $16 to $20 per pound (4)
10. Costco wild coho, from Alaska; $10.99 per pound (3.9)
Much has changed, and for the better, since the early days of salmon farming.
“We have certainly seen improvements in the performance of the aquaculture sector over the years, and we expect even more to come as a greater number of farms understand the imperative of operating with great care for the environment and those who work on their farms,” noted Kellogg-Winters. “The farms that voluntarily commit to the ASC have to operate in a transparent manner: they must keep records, work well with the community and improve their environmental performance to meet the standard.”
You can stay current on salmon and other seafood by checking FishWatch, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website. The site profiles six salmon species: chum, coho, chinook, sockeye, pink and Atlantic (both wild and farmed).
Want to try your hand at whipping up a great salmon dinner? Listen to a segment of NPR’s “America’s Test Kitchen” on cooking wild versus farm-raised salmon.
Also, check out these salmon recipes from Norway.
What you thought (or heard) about farmed salmon is probably wrong. Let's take a look at the most popular myths and shed some light on the truth.
As the winter months near, you may be in the midst of harvest. Perhaps you’ve already started thinking about how to increase your crop quality or increase your yield next year.
As you consider how to better your crops, there are a few things you can do now to prepare your soil for the winter and the eventual spring.
Topsoil has been a big topic of discussion across the globe. Each year, erosion eliminates some of our fields’ topsoil, and it takes many years to try and rebuild it, if it can be done at all. One way to maintain the top soil in your fields is to keep it covered throughout the winter by broadcasting or drilling in a cover crop post-harvest.
One of the challenges of minimum tillage or no-till practices is the buildup of residue on the soil post-harvest and pre-plant. To help reduce this buildup of residue and use it to benefit your soil, try applying a soil amendment like Soil-Set®. By breaking down that buildup of residue, it will turn into organic matter for the soil, and planting may be a bit easier, too.
Many people only soil test their fields on a biannual or triannual basis, making it difficult to have a solid understanding of what is going on in their fields year after year. By getting your soil tested post-harvest, you can have a better idea of what you need to apply in the spring to get the most out of your soil and ultimately grow a better crop. Many agriculture retailers offer this as a service and can help with the planning of proper nutrient placement and timing once the results are back.
Want to learn more about getting your soil set for success? Click here to contact us.
<p>
Preparing soil for the winter can help producers improve crop quality and increase yield next spring.
</p>
How much do you know about the mineral program on your dairy? What level are minerals used in your rations, and what type are they? The mineral program on your dairy has a big impact on the health and productivity of your herd. Dairy producers are generally aware that part of their feed cost includes the minerals they supplement but have no real way to measure the success of their program.
Forages and concentrates meet some of the mineral needs of dairy cattle. They do not, however, meet the total mineral requirements of healthy productive cattle. Therefore, supplemental trace minerals are required to maintain cow health, production, reproduction and adequate mineral stores in the animal.
The minerals supplemented to dairy cows are classified in two ways: macro and trace minerals. Macro minerals are minerals that are fed in quantities of grams, including calcium, phosphorous, potassium, magnesium, sodium, chlorine and sulfur. Trace minerals are those fed at milligram quantities, including zinc, copper, iodine, selenium, cobalt and molybdenum. Alltech is an industry leader in organic trace mineral programs, with extensive research and industry-leading technologies such as Bioplex® and Sel-Plex®.
Designing an effective mineral program is difficult, especially considering the small inclusion in the diet and variation in mineral content. The National Research Council is generally referenced as a guideline to formulate diets; however, the guidelines are not always up to date and are often ignored. As a result, arbitrary levels are chosen to supplement.
Mineral interactions can cause antagonistic effects. For instance, molybdenum, iron and sulfur are some of the minerals that reduce the absorption of other minerals supplemented. Mineral source also has an impact. Organic minerals have been shown to have greater bioavailability than inorganic minerals. Bioavailability of Bioplex® Zinc, for example, is greater than zinc sulfate (J.L. Pierce, et. al. 2006). Considering all the factors at play, correct levels of supplementation are difficult to accomplish.
A survey by the University of Wisconsin-Madison on liver samples from dairy cattle in Wisconsin confirmed the challenges of supplementing trace minerals. Analysis of liver samples indicated that copper was elevated and potentially detrimental (Lyman, 2013). It is important to note, however, that differences in geography and feeding practices within the dairy industry mean that knowing the challenges that are unique to your area are critical when formulating your mineral programs.
This past summer, through the help of a local veterinary clinic and an Alltech summer intern, we set out to measure the success of mineral programs along the Interstate 29 corridor. Ben Sieve, Alltech intern, and Dr. Corale Dorn of Dells Veterinary Clinic collected liver samples from dairies along Interstate 29. Liver biopsies on seven cows from five dairies were collected for a total of 35 cows. Samples were analyzed at Michigan State University. Water and TMR were also collected and analyzed by Dairyland Laboratories. Sampled cows averaged 100 days in milk. Average herd size was around 2,000 cows milking.
Elevated copper levels in liver samples were not as common along Interstate 29 compared to the data collected in Wisconsin. Using Michigan State University’s laboratory for analysis, six of the 35 cows measured showed elevated copper levels. Average copper concentration in South Dakota was a 132 parts per million (ppm) wet weight, which compared to an average ppm wet weight of 163 in the Wisconsin survey.
Interestingly, we found that zinc deficiency may be more prevalent than we realize. Fifty percent of the sample results were deficient in zinc, according to Michigan State University standards.
Selenium levels in South Dakota are often a concern due to elevated selenium in the soil. Elevated selenium levels were observed with some of the dairies surveyed.
It is well-documented that organic minerals have higher bioavailability than inorganic ingredients, such as zinc and copper sulfate. Research conducted on Bioplex minerals has identified programs in which 100 percent of the minerals supplemented from organic sources delivered positive performance response. In that trial, cows on 100 percent Bioplex minerals produced 442 kilograms (972 pounds) more milk in a 305-day lactation and had 34 percent lower somatic cell count (SCC) (Kinal, 2007). These programs decrease the excretion of unused minerals, decrease the risk of antagonists and have demonstrated strong production responses in research trials.
One of the dairies involved in the Interstate 29 mineral study implemented these practices into their mineral program. Hilltop Dairy started feeding Bioplex minerals in fall 2016. By using Bioplex, they required lower levels of minerals. The results from the liver survey showed Hilltop Dairy more appropriately in the ranges suggested by Michigan State University.
“After nearly a year, our dairy’s SCC is down 43 percent, and we are up in milk production compared to last year,” said Hilltop Dairy owner, Wilfried Reuvekamp. “Normally in the summer, SCC goes up and production goes down. We have never had a summer like this!”
Learn more information on Bioplex® and Sel-Plex®.
The mineral program you choose can have a significant impact on the productivity of your herd.
There’s a coolness in the air, and leaves are starting to turn. The onset of fall weather means harvest season is upon us. During this time, farmers have much work to do in a short time. That sense of urgency can lead to accidents and damage that might otherwise have been prevented.
While we want you to accomplish your tasks efficiently, we’d like to ensure you do so safely. Therefore, we’ve compiled some recommended safety guidelines that should be useful reminders during your busy season.
Harvest inevitably means long hours spent behind the wheel of heavy machinery, and the safe completion of related tasks depends on both overall knowledge and attentiveness. It’s perfectly normal for us to take pride in our work, especially if that means putting in long hours in pursuit of a common goal. This is particularly evident in harvesting operations. Yet exhaustion and sickness regularly contribute to accidents in the field. It is important to recognize what your body is trying to tell you. If you aren’t feeling your best, consider turning the operation over to a trusted friend while you recover.
Keep in mind these safety tips:
Farm workers should all know the hazards of flowing grain and how to prevent a grain entrapment situation. When grain is being unloaded from the bottom of a bin, it flows downward from the top center, creating a funnel effect. If a person is on top of the grain in a bin being unloaded, they can be pulled into the flowing grain within a matter of seconds, likely rendering them helpless and potentially resulting in suffocation. Anybody who works with grain, in any capacity, must be aware of the dangers.
If you must enter a bin, it is vitally important to follow these safety precautions:
If you need to drive your equipment on any roadways, you should consider the following safety tips:
It is our hope that, by following these and other appropriate farm safety guidelines, you will have a productive and safe harvest not only this year, but for many years to come.
The sense of urgency inherent in harvest season can lead to preventable accidents. We've gathered some tips for a safer harvest.
You may be wondering, “When is the right time to begin building healthy soil?” While this answer may surprise you, the right time is always now. Whether you are choosing the seeds for your next crop or have just finished harvesting your fields, planning your sustainable soil management strategies should always be top of mind.
Through seasons of use, soils can become depleted of nutrients and organic matter. If left unattended, this will lead to a decrease in yields for the grower. Additionally, soil depletion is not a phenomenon that is limited to the farmer; the home grower and gardener can face the same issues in their own front or backyards.
Proactive growers work for their soil to ensure that it works for them.
Healthy soil — which is soil that has a high organic matter content, a balanced structure and high nutrient availability — provides an excellent basis for plants. It can decrease the amount of inputs that a grower needs to use, since many of the nutritional requirements of the crops will already be supplied through the soil. This increased nutrient availability can also help plants to develop stronger roots and become naturally more resistant to environmental stressors.
The four tips included below will help increase your soil health in a sustainable way and will lead to noticeable improvements for years to come.
Between all the animals (like worms and insects) and the millions of microbes that make their homes in the ground, healthy soil is teeming with life. Each of these creatures plays a role in nutrient cycling, which is the process of breaking down crop residue, such as corn stubble, and degrading it into organic matter in the soil. Once the breakdown process is complete, the nutrients then become available for use by the plants. When plants use the nutrients that are available in the soil, growers can begin using more specific additives and fertilizers instead of deploying widespread “just in case” spraying.
Tilling can damage the soil environment and should only be used to improve problem areas, including where the soil is compacted or where drainage issues are heavily impacting the fields. Tilling can also increase the number of weeds in a field by bringing them to the surface, where they can germinate and grow. These weeds will compete with the intended crop for nutrients and take over precious field space, potentially decreasing crop yields.
Using cover crops has become increasingly popular, and for good reason. Not only do cover crops offer another opportunity for growers to improve their soil makeup, since their use increases the availability of nutrients like nitrogen in the soil, but they also significantly reduce the likelihood of soil erosion. When fields are kept uncovered after harvest and during the winter, they become susceptible to erosion from wind and rain, which leaves the grower a step behind in building a healthy foundation for springtime crops.
The type and amount of nutrients used by different crops will vary depending on which crop is being grown. Different crops also will increase the availability of different nutrients, which can be used by the crops that follow. Crop rotation also plays a part in preventing soil erosion. Not only does the field remain covered, but as each crop’s roots grow to varying lengths, they will hold onto the soil at different depths throughout the seasons, maintaining stability against heavier rains and winds.
While these steps are great ways to improve your soil and ensure that it will continue to be the hardworking first step toward producing a healthy plant and a profitable yield, their results can be maximized when combined with other management tools. Soil testing throughout your fields, for instance, will help you pinpoint areas of concern. Field scouting during the growing season will help the grower catch any areas where there might be a nutrient deficiency or disease pressure before the problem becomes widespread and requires more intervention. By combining all the tools at their disposal, growers can give crops the best possible foundation for seasons to come in a proactive and sustainable way.
Want to learn more? Sign up for Top Crop, our newsletter full of information on sustainable management practices, grower stories from around the world and news from Alltech Crop Science.
Using sustainable soil management practices, we can build healthy soils for the next growing season.
Working in Wisconsin, the dairy capital of the world, I see many dairies and parlors on a daily basis. I know the milking routine is very important in all dairy operations, because a lot of milk can either be gained or lost in the parlor. When I go into a parlor, I look for what I call “cowsistency.” I like to see the milking technicians following the same milking routine between milkings, between sessions and between months. We want all the technicians doing the same routine calmly and consistently, because the milking routine is so important to the quality of the milk produced and the safety of the dairy herd.
One of the first things that we talk about when assessing a milking routine — and a lot of people miss this — is brushing. When the cows come in and we get ready to prep them, brushing should be one of the first things done, to get sand or soil off the teats.
I am often called to a dairy because the cows are “dancing” while they are being milked. This is partially because the technicians have left the sand on and covered it in pre-dip solution, and then they are unable to wipe the sand off completely when it is wet.
One of the most important things you can do in your routine is get a dry towel and brush gently, to remove sand and soil from the cow’s teats, prior to doing anything else.
The next step we like to do is called forestripping. The goal should be to get two to three squirts out of each teat. This is important to the milking routine because it releases a powerful let-down hormone and makes the cow think that her calf is there.
Forestripping also gives us the opportunity to check the milk to see if there are any abnormalities about it. Additionally, those first few squirts of milk will give a good indication of whether a cow has mastitis.
Another important part of forestripping is from a milk quality standpoint, because those first few squirts of milk are high in somatic cells, so we can lower the somatic cell count of the milk just by forestripping prior to milking.
Another vital aspect to the milking routine is the pre-dip. In this step, we want to completely cover the teats with a pre-dip solution to adequately kill bacteria on the outside of the teats.
When the milking technicians come back through the second time, make sure that dry, clean towels are used with a downward circular motion technique. Also, as a follow-up to this step in the milking process, be sure to flip the towel over and use it to clean the teat ends. Getting the teat ends clean is very important to decreasing the environmental challenges that can lead to mastitis, and to keeping the cows and the milk safe from harmful bacteria.
Once we get the cows cleaned and prepped, we come back and attach the unit squarely at the base of the udder so that we milk all quarters out correctly. At the conclusion of milking, once the units are detached, we come back with a high quality post-dip, making sure to gently but completely dip the teats, submerging them over the point where the film of milk ends. If we don’t do an adequate job and only get part of the teats in a post-dip, all the milk remaining is an organic load, making food for bacteria.
The milking claw is vital in our milking routine, because it gets the milk from the teat to the tank. One of the things I look at on the milking unit is whether the liner in the shell is lined up straight in relation to the outer shell. If the liner is twisted, we cannot adequately milk out that quarter.
Another very important portion of the claw to look at is the hose support. How well are we supporting the claw in relation to the square base of the udder?
Tom Lorenzen, milk quality specialist at Alltech, walks through the five most critical steps in the milking routine.
In “The corn conundrum,” we looked at some of the causes of the dreaded “fall slump.” Now we will look at some of the ways to prevent the slump as well as tools to help diagnose it.
We all know the importance of proper dry matter at harvest. Checking whole plant dry matter for each field is a good first step to having the correct dry matter at harvest.
Chopping too early can lower the starch content of the corn silage and impede fermentation, which can also contribute to the environmental issue of leachate. On the other hand, chopping too late (>40 percent dry matter) can lead to a separate set of problems, such as mycotoxins, poor fermentation, yeast production, decreased starch digestibility and a longer window for total starch digestion.
If we monitor the seven-hour starch digestibility and ammonia levels of fresh corn silage, it can tell us a lot about how the corn is fermenting. Typically, fall corn silage will be low in both the seven-hour starch and ammonia. As the silage ferments over 240 days, the ammonia levels rise and the starch digestibility increases.
We know that inoculants can speed up fermentation and lower pH, thus saving energy for the cow. Inoculants enable us to get into the piles, bags, bunkers and silos even faster than before.
Future outlook is strong is this area. Work is being done on combinations of inoculants and enzymes to assist in both starch digestion and fiber digestion, which will serve to further our efficiencies.
Inoculants can cater to front end fermentation or feed out protection. Cater your inoculant to your individual situation.
Inoculants coupled with a quality mold inhibitor can be the ultimate line of defense against molds, top spoilage and stability issues. Mold-Zap®, a buffered propionic acid, has been the gold standard in alleviating seasonal total mixed ration heating, but very keen dairymen also use it for preventing top spoilage in bunkers, drive over piles and on silage faces.
Shredlage, a new corn harvesting method for silage, is gaining acceptance. Most importantly, shredlage processing has led to a renewed interest in proper corn silage kernel processing with the choppers many producers already have. With proper corn silage processing, the kernels can be processed down to the new standard of ¼” kernels.
The Corn Silage Processing Score (CSPS) is a great testing tool that is run at virtually all the forage labs in the U.S. because it will assess how well the corn silage has been processed. A Corn Silage Processing Score in the 40–60 percent range is common in unprocessed corn silage and can equate to lost milk. Setting a goal of achieving a processing score above 70 percent will help you reduce the corn silage slump and the impacts it has on your herd.
Before we get CSPS numbers back, is there another way to know if we are correctly processing the corn silage? A new technique involving “floating” fresh corn silage is getting some attention, and it’s easy to find articles and images of the procedure online. The process is very simple and can be accomplished in the field, right at the chopper, but you will need a sample of fresh corn silage, a 5-gallon bucket and some water.
It is a dirty job, but someone really does have to do it. Manure can tell you a lot about how things are working inside the cow.
It’s worthwhile to consider a couple of tools that have been around for a few years.
The Penn State Particle Separator has been used for years to monitor fiber levels in the diet. The particle separator’s “messy” cousin, the manure screen, can tell you just as much, if not more. The true value of manure screening is monitoring over time and with ration changes. With the transition to new crop corn silage, you can see the impact of the new feed. Many times with new crop corn silage, you will see the kernel remnants in the middle screen and fiber changes in the various screens. Benchmarking your manure screens is a great approach because it will enable you to see what the rumen is doing and you can make ration adjustments quicker than if you use a paper-only approach.
While we are messing around with the manure, there is yet another tool that is underutilized, and that tool is fecal starch. Fecal starch testing is done at most commercial feed labs and can tell you a lot about kernel processing and starch digestion, so it can help you to confirm your CSPS scores and the level of starch digestion. Your goal should be to keep the fecal starch under 3 percent, even though you can commonly see the levels initially rise with new crop corn silage samples.
Some of the undigested corn can bypass the rumen and cause hindgut fermentation, which can lead to indigestion and rumen upset. The starch-digesting enzyme Amaize® and certain strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae can assist in breaking down starch and maintaining a proper rumen environment.
Additionally, we know that soluble protein and ammonia levels are at lower levels in fresh corn silage. Products that assist in adjusting the rumen degradable protein levels can help jumpstart the rumen microbial production and assist in starch and fiber digestion. Optigen® can help fuel the rumen in the absence of good new crop soluble protein and ammonia levels.
Ultimately, the best way to reduce the fall corn silage slump is not to feed it. It may be frustrating to receive that advice, but it remains true. Starch digestion is often slow, and new crop corn silage should be given three months to properly ferment. Obviously, the longer the fermentation, the better, but there should be a plan in place to have a few months’ carryover of your corn silage crop.
When we must feed fresh corn silages, the tools discussed above can help to reduce the corn silage slump. Ask your local Alltech representative for more information on how we can help you to reduce the new crop corn silage blues.
<p>
The best way to reduce the fall corn silage slump is not to feed it. If that's not an option for you, John Winchell shares some ways that you can prevent and diagnose a silage slump.
</p>
