Beef Genetics News

Beef Improvement Federation Announces 2026 Producer of the Year Award Finalists

Tue, 26 May 2026 22:38:40 GMT

Since 1972, the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) has annually recognized outstanding seedstock and commercial producers who demonstrate industry leadership and commitment to genetic improvement.

BIF has announced its finalists for the 2026 Commercial Producer and Seedstock Producer of the Year awards. The awards will be presented during the 2026 BIF Research Symposium and Convention, June 1-4, in Boise, Idaho. Four finalists in the commercial category and three finalists in the seedstock category will be recognized. The BIF Producer of the Year awards are sponsored by Drovers.

2026 Commercial Producer of the Year finalists, in alphabetical order:

Autauga Farming Company of Alabama, nominated by the Alabama Beef Cattle Improvement Association
Mike Petrie and Sons of Kansas, nominated by the Kansas Livestock Association
SS Cattle Company of Idaho, nominated by the University of Idaho and the Idaho Cattle Association
Jon and Patty Tebelius of North Dakota, nominated by the Red Angus Association of America

The 2026 Commercial Producer of the Year will be announced on June 2.

2026 Seedstock Producer of the Year finalists, in alphabetical order:

Colyer Herefords and Angus of Idaho, nominated by the American Hereford Association
Jensen Ranch of Kansas, nominated by the Kansas Livestock Association
Maples Stock Farm of Alabama, nominated by the Alabama Beef Cattle Improvement Association

The 2026 Seedstock Producer of the Year will be announced on June 3.

Finalists are also recognized through the BIF Commercial and Seedstock Producer Honor Rolls of Excellence. To learn more about the Producer Honor Roll and other BIF information, visit beefimprovement.org .

For information about the 2026 BIF Symposium and Convention, visit BIFsymposium.com .

CattleFax 2025 Survey: Record $2,246 Calf Revenue Drives Historic Cow-Calf Profits

Tue, 19 May 2026 19:42:56 GMT

Cow-calf producers navigated a high-stakes market in 2025, according to the latest CattleFax survey. The latest survey reveals a paradox in the 2025 cattle market: while it has never been more expensive to keep a cow, it has also rarely been more profitable to sell a calf. With data representing 300,000 cows across 40 states, the report provides a definitive benchmark for producers navigating today’s volatile environment.

“Surging calf prices in 2025 far outpaced the increase in cow costs leading to the strongest cow-calf profits recorded since CattleFax has been conducting this survey,” says CattleFax Analyst Matthew McQuagge.

The average herd size within this sample increased to 391 cows, which McQuagge explains is primarily due to a decrease in participants with 100 or fewer head.

Record Cash Cow Costs vs. Surging Calf Revenue

Cash cow costs increased $27 per head to $780 for a new record in the CattleFax database. However, higher calf prices have continued to offset the elevated costs. Participants reported an average revenue of $2,246 per calf in 2025, up $631 from 2024. Adjusting for weaning percentages, average cow-calf profit margins increased by $614 per head compared to 2024. Steer weaning weights were 7 lb. higher at 563 lb. and heifers were also up 7 lb. to 528 lb. The weaned calf crop percentage saw a small improvement in 2025 with an average of 87.9%.

	U.S. Average
2025 Cow Costs vs. Calf Revenue
Calf Value	$2,246
Cow Cost (as reported)	$780
Weaned Calf Crop %	87.9%
Cow Cost (% calf crop adjusted)	$897
Profit (% calf crop adjusted)	$1,361
Estimated Cost for Unpaid Labor & Depreciation	$288
Estimated Net Margin	$1,073
Weaning Weights
Steers	563
Heifers	528
Pounds Weaned per Exposed Female	478
Other Factors
Cow Herd Size	391
Bull Purchase Price	$7,542
Planned expansion from 2025 to 2026
Increase herd by 10% or more	33%
Increase herd by less than 10%	18%
No change or minimal change in herd size	38%
Reduce herd by less than 10%	6%
Reduce herd by 10% or more	5%

(CattleFax)

Benchmarking High-Return vs. Low-Return Operations

“Producer profitability continued to show wide ranges, driven by differences in costs, revenues, weaning rates and calf weights,” McQuagge says. “High-return producers consistently generate 10% more pounds weaned per exposed female than average and low-return operations. This is driven in large part by a tighter calving season length which, in turn, supports both heavier calf weights at weaning as well as a larger overall weaning percentage.”

Every year, CattleFax sorts survey responses into three equal-sized categories based on weaning-adjusted profit status to further evaluate what sets “high-return” producers apart from “average” or “low-return” operators. High-return operations recorded an average net return of $1,726 per head while low-return ones received an average of $1,001 per head, which McQuagge says is still a historically strong margin.

While the entire sector saw historically strong margins, “high-return” operations separated themselves through vaccination, weaning programs and superior calf crop percentages.

“The last two years have noted a more uniform spread of both cow costs and calf values between return groups, likely attributed to higher calf prices creating a greater, more even distribution in profits among operations,” he says. “High-return operations were characterized as placing greater emphasis on managerial practices that result in a larger weaned calf crop percentage of 90% compared to low- and average-return producers with 85% and 88% calf crops respectively.”

High-return producers were also more likely to implement value-added production practices such as vaccination and weaning programs.

High-return producers were also more likely to implement value-added production practices such as vaccination and weaning programs.

(CattleFax)

Key Management Correlations for High Returns

McQuagge says other management practices that stand out across time for increasing an operations’ net margin is having two-plus rounds of vaccinations and weaning for over 45 days. The 2025 data identifies three critical areas where management directly impacts the bottom line:

Calving Season Length: Shorter calving intervals (0 to 45 days) resulted in the highest weaning weights (averaging 555 lb.) compared to 90-plus day intervals (484 lb.).
Vaccination Protocols: Calf value peaked for producers who vaccinated three to four times, adding hundreds of dollars in value compared to zero-vaccination programs.
Bull Investment: There is a direct correlation between bull purchase price and calf revenue. Bulls purchased for more than $9,500 consistently produced the highest-value calves.

(CattleFax)

How Much Does it Cost to Keep a Cow?

Cash cow costs reached a new record in the CattleFax database.

Average Cash Cow Cost: $780 per head (up $27 from the previous year).
Cost Breakdown: Feed and hay remain the largest expenses (34%), followed by pasture (32%) and hired labor (14%).
Regional Highs: The Northern Plains reported the highest cash costs at $861 per head, while the Southeast remained the lowest at $703.

Is the U.S. Cattle Herd Expanding?

The survey suggests a strong intent to grow the national herd through 2027:

2026 Expansion: 33% of U.S. producers plan to increase their herd by 10% or more.
2027 Outlook: 29% of producers expect to continue expanding by 10% or more, indicating long-term confidence in the market.

Regional Performance Benchmarks

The survey highlights significant differences in production across the U.S. regions:

Northern Plains: Led the nation in steer weaning weights (576 lb.) and pregnancy percentage (93%).
Southern Plains: Reported a 571-lb. steer weaning weight and a 55-day average calving interval.
Southeast: While weaning weights were lower (536 lb. for steers), the region benefited from the lowest cash costs in the country.
Corn Belt: Reported the smallest average herd size at 143 head, compared to the West’s 669 head.

Market Outlook: Will Tight Calf Supplies Maintain Producer Leverage?

Patrick Linnell, CattleFax director of market research, summarizes, “Ultimately, the current market environment has supported the average cow-calf producer in making record profits over the past few years with strong likelihood that this sector will continue to maintain favorable leverage over the next couple of years as domestic calf supplies remain tight.”

He adds, while every operation’s situation is unique, opportunities exist through increasing efficiencies or managing cost to improve profitability, regardless of the current market environment.

The CattleFax 2025 Cow-Calf Survey was sponsored by Crystalyx and Sweetlix. CattleFax will host a free webinar reviewing the survey as well as a market outlook on May 20 at 5:30 p.m. MT.

Your Next Reads:

Beyond the Hide: How Data and Heat Tolerance are Powering the Red Angus Surge

Tue, 12 May 2026 19:24:14 GMT

Commercial cattle producers looking ahead to the next cow cycle are rethinking cow size, hide color and heat tolerance — and many are landing on Red Angus.

“We have record-low numbers of cows, supplies are tight and they’re tight at a time when consumer demand for quality beef is at a record level,” says Greg Ruehle, Red Angus Association of America CEO. “It’s like a perfect storm. It’s one of those opportunities that you don’t see maybe once in your career.”

Ruehle was the featured guest in Episode 21 of “ The Future of Beef Show. ” During the discussion, Ruehle lays out why the breed’s maternal efficiency, carcass quality and verification tools are helping red-hided cattle earn their place in pastures from the High Plains to the humid South.

For Red Angus breeders, he says, the timing is ideal as demand for their genetics and bull sale averages have surged, with many sales averaging $12,500 to $15,000 per head. He notes that Red Angus-influenced replacement females are extremely hard to find because so many are diverted into feeding channels to meet demand.

When asked what makes Red Angus distinct from black Angus, Ruehle underscores the genetics are the same, but the U.S. uniquely manages the breeds in separate herd books.

Seven key takeaways from the podcast discussion include:

1. Perfect Timing for Red Angus in a Tight Market

Record-low cow numbers and record-high demand for high-quality beef create a rare window where Red Angus genetics are in strong demand — for both bulls and replacement females.

2. Same Angus Genetics, But with a Red, Often More Heat-Tolerant Package

Ruehle explains Red and black Angus come from the same genetic pool, but Red Angus offers that Angus-quality eating experience in a hide that often fits heat- and humidity-challenged environments better, especially across the South.

3. Strong Maternal Cows Plus Carcass Performance on the Rail

Functionally, he frames Red Angus as a dual-purpose tool: a moderate, efficient, rugged maternal cow and a quality-driven sire for carcass performance. On the cow side, he highlights moderate size, docility, fertility and longevity, plus the ability to travel and forage efficiently. On the sire side, Red Angus brings quality grade, yield grade and feedlot performance.

4. Built for Crossbreeding and Heterosis — Char, Bos indicus and Beyond

He says the breed fits naturally into crossbreeding systems: Charolais × Red Angus buckskins, American Reds (Red Angus × Bos indicus), Premium Red Baldy (Red Angus × Hereford) and other combinations that target both heterosis and market recognition.

5. Focused on Killing the “Red Discount” with Verification and Data

Ruehle stresses a top priority for the association and its board is eliminating unnecessary price discounts on red-hided calves versus black.

“We do that a lot of ways,” he explains. “We do it by tracking those animals, making sure that we can differentiate them from another red-hided animal in the marketplace. EPDs and the ability to use other DNA tools to track and measure performance on those cattle are absolutely vital.”

6. A Data-Driven, Commercially Oriented Association

Red Angus stands out for mandatory total-herd reporting and required birth and weaning data on every registered calf, supporting trustworthy EPDs and a culture that stays anchored to commercial performance, not just the show ring.

“Red Angus is the only breed that has a mandatory total-herd reporting requirement,” Ruehle says. “We’re the only one that requires you to register and pay on every cow in your herd every year. Every animal to be registered has to have a birth weight and a weaning weight.”

7. Individual-Animal ID and Feedback Loops Are the Future Edge

By tying EID-based, individual-animal data from the plant back to the feedyard and then to specific cows and sires, Red Angus aims to speed genetic progress and help producers make more informed breeding and marketing decisions.

“If we can bring data back from that animal performance in the feedyard, back to the ranch, and tie that back to a cow and a bull, I think then things really get exciting, and we can see improvements happen quickly,” he summarizes.

Looking into the crystal ball, Ruehle sees opportunity and risk intertwined. The opportunity is to rebuild the cow herd with a more thoughtful genetic base and to cement Red Angus as a key contributor — especially in heat-stressed, forage-based systems. The risk lies in mismanaging consumer trust by failing to consistently deliver the high-quality beef experience that has driven demand. He believes Red Angus’ combination of PVP infrastructure, individual animal ID and a data-first culture puts the breed in a strong position that others will struggle to replicate.

Registration Open for 2026 BIF Symposium

Fri, 10 Apr 2026 16:29:59 GMT

Registration is now open for the 2026 Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Research Symposium and Convention that will be hosted June 1 to 4 in Boise, Idaho. Full registration participants can save $75 if they take advantage of the early bird rate by May 1.

Full registration before May 1 is $325. This includes two-and-one-half days of educational programming focused on beef industry profitability. It also includes the Welcome Reception on Monday evening, lunch on Tuesday and Wednesday, and an off-site social with dinner on Tuesday evening. The student early bird rate is $250.

The hotel housing portal is open as well. Visit BIFSymposium.com and click on the “ Hotel & Location ” information link. The hotel block closes May 1.

Monday, June 1, kicks off with the Young Producer Symposium at 1 p.m., followed by the Welcome and Scholarship Reception. Both events will be in the Pioneer Room of the beautiful and inspiring JUMP conference space in downtown Boise.

This year’s Young Producer Symposium is open to all attendees but aimed at the young, or young at heart. This year’s session is themed “Rebuilding the Herd” to tackle two important questions:

How do you select the best replacement females for a growing beef herd?
What business skills are needed to equip the next generation of beef producers?

“The Young Producer Symposium is designed for the next generation of beef industry leaders,” says Bob Weaber, BIF executive director. “The symposium provides practical insights and networking to help young producers strengthen their operations through improved genetics, management and strategic planning.”

Tuesday’s general session will focus on “Beef in 2050: Investment in Beef, Cows and Research for Success.” Presentations and speakers will include:

New Heights in Beef Demand: Consumer Investment in the Beef Value Chain – Dave Weaber, Terrain
Beef Sector Economics: Supply-Side Inventories and Growth Opportunities – Derrell Peel, Oklahoma State University
Beef Cow Adaptability: The Western Range Cow (as an example)
- Adaptation Impacts on Biological and Reproductive Efficiency of the Cow – Tim DelCurto, Montana State University
- Economic Impacts on the Ranch System/Efficiency – David Secrist, Utah State University
Public Investment in Beef Production Research: A Call to Action – Ronnie Green, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Speaker Panel Discussion: Beef 2050 – Moderated by Nevil Speer, Turkey Track Consulting

Wednesday’s general session theme will be “Capturing the Value of Genetic Investments.” Presentations and speakers will include:

Leveraging Genetic Decisions Across the Value Chain: The Simplot Story – Randall Raymond, Simplot Livestock
Capturing the Value of Genetics and Management: The Country Natural Beef Cooperative Story – Tylor Braden, Country Natural Beef
Beef x Dairy: Terminal Genetics that Drive Demand and Capture Value – Kee Jim, GK Jim Group of Companies
Advancing Red Meat Yield: Innovation in Carcass Evaluation – Dale Woerner, Texas Tech University

Tuesday and Wednesday afternoon technical breakout sessions will focus on a range of beef production and genetic improvement topics.

Thursday will include two tour options, where participants can learn more about Idaho’s beef industry. One is a “conception to harvest” option, with stops such as CS Beef Packers, Simplot Animal Sciences IVF Lab, Reynolds Creek Calf Ranch, Colyer Hereford and Angus Ranch, Simplot Land and Livestock Feedlot and TLK Dairy.

The other tour option is a more diversified Idaho agriculture experience with beef-related stops, including Amalgamated Sugar Plant, PerforMix Nutrition Systems Plant (Nampa), Agri Beef/Snake River Farms Wagyu Bull Center, PerforMix Nutrition Dry Mineral and Block Plant (Fruitland), Boise Valley Feeders and Shaw Cattle Company.

For registration and more symposium details, visit BIFSymposium.com . Prior to and during this year’s symposium, be sure to follow the event on social media channels using the hashtag #BIF2026.

Each year the BIF symposium draws a large group of leading seedstock and commercial beef producers, academics and allied industry partners. The attendance list is a “who’s who” of the beef value chain, which offers great networking opportunities and conversations about the issues of the day. Program topics focus on how the beef industry can enhance value through genetic improvement across a range of attributes that affect the value chain.

Building for the Long Haul: The Hermes Strategy for Premium Bred Heifers

Tue, 07 Apr 2026 18:07:56 GMT

Selecting and managing highly desirable heifers is Anton Hermes’ specialty. He offers various services to develop heifers on a custom basis for customers and markets his own bred heifers.

Alongside his brother, Derek, who runs Hermes Genetics, Hermes manages Hermes Livestock, and the brothers work hand-in-hand to breed sale and customer cattle. They travel and breed around 10,000 to 12,000 head a year with their artificial insemination (AI) services. For his own herd of commercial mother cows, Hermes will purchase heifers from AI customers or ranches the brothers do business with.

“The customers bring their heifers to our grow yard where we feed and develop them, and later artificially inseminate them, then send them back to the customers pregnant,” Hermes explains.

(Hermes Family)

Steps to Developing a Bred Heifer

The heifer selection process starts with their home-raised females and then buying load lots of females, often from Colorado, Nebraska and Wyoming ranches. Then they do pelvic measurements, bangs vaccinations and sort non-breeders into grass cattle groups.

“We prefer to buy heifers when they’re 500 to 600 lb. in the fall, but we will buy some later in the spring if we have pasture available,” Hermes says. “About 200 of these heifers would be grown in our own herd.”

Hermes Livestock’s heifer program consists of Red Angus, F1 red baldies, black Angus and F1 black baldies. Hermes says he prefers the Hereford influence in their F1 heifers but also breeds purebred Angus and Red Angus.

When sorting heifers to the top of the group to develop and market as bred females, he looks for the feminine, moderate-framed heifers with adequate temperament.

“That’s what we’re after, and that’s what our customers are after,” Hermes says. “A lot of times there will be 500 head, and we want to sort 150 off the top to keep for us to breed. We look for something that’s structurally put together, that can walk miles out here in eastern Colorado or Oklahoma or Wyoming or wherever they will end up, and really maternal. We want these cows to live to be 12 years old and still be productive in the cow herd. We’re trying to build the cow herd in the U.S. right now, so maternal longevity is very important. We strive to develop these problem-free cattle that function in any environment.”

Once heifers are sorted, they synchronize them at the grow yard and breed heifers using AI. If they don’t show a heat, he will synchronize and AI again, so every heifer gets a chance to get bred on the AI cycle. After, they are turned out with bulls on grass.

Hermes chooses the bulls he’s going to breed customer heifers to by using them on his herd first.

“I test all the bulls on my own cows. I’ll find a young, up-and-coming sire that I really like and I’ll use them on my own heifers,” Hermes explains. “We’ll calve them out and if they pass the test we’ll use those the next year on the commercial groups. Typically, it’s all ABS genetics. They have an exceptional lineup of calving-ease bulls. We have some mainstays that we’ve used for four years in a row now that are just so popular that we can’t get away from them.”

Other bull selection criteria are liking the bull’s phenotype. Many of the bred heifers sold will go on to produce replacement females for producers so phenotype is important to Hermes.

“We’ll sell somewhere between, depending on the year, 600 to 1,100 head and we’ll market them through a couple different sales of our own as well as private treaty,” he says.

(Photos provided by the Hermes family)

Selling Across the States

Hermes helped start the Maternal Merit Sale Group with Dan Warner of Warner Beef Genetics and Don Maclennan with Valhalla Ranch. The sale offers bred heifers through live auction twice a year in Arapahoe, Neb., and Denver, Colo., at the National Western Stock Show. The Nebraska sale sells heifers in groups based on breed, size and AI- or bull-bred sire. He hopes to add another sale in Colorado this fall.

“We identify the sire groups then; we sort off by size and docility. We are especially picky on the heifer’s docility,” Hermes says of the heifers selected for the sale. “If they’ve got too much fire, then we sort them off. We don’t put them through our sales or private treaty large groups. We’ll sort them by breed and size, and then we’ll market them through that sale, and they usually go to about nine to 13 different states; we will deliver them right from there.”

The sale has offered up to 700 head between Anton, Warner and Maclennan.

The Denver Maternal Merit Sale started after a meeting with Warner, Maclennan and Bobby Strecker, ABS Global district manager. After which Hermes wrote the National Western Stock Show a letter in 2020 and asked if they would add a commercial heifer sale to the lineup at the new facility when it was done.

“We are trying to bring a commercial element back to the National Western and this sale gave us an excuse to do that,” Hermes explains.

Maclennan says it’s given them a platform to show commercial producers the quality of heifers brought to the sale.

“We are very particular on quality and after the first year, people saw that,” Maclennan says. “They have supported us quite nicely since then. We have had nothing but repeat buyers coming and either buying or at least bidding.”

Starting with around 400 Red Angus heifers selected in May, Maclennan will sort off the top 50 or 60.

“Throw them through so many hoops that by the time Denver comes, we’ll have 15 to 20 that are just the elite,” Maclennan says. “They’ve got excited about it and we had a really good crowd.”

The strategy in Denver differed from Arapahoe in that they were showcasing their programs developing heifers and offering programing for commercial producers at a major stock show.

“We’re really just trying to showcase the front end of our commercial genetics as a marketing tool and to bring the basic commercial element of the cattlemen back to Denver,” Hermes adds. “It’s a good tool for us to use for marketing, but it’s also been a good tool for the public. We have since added speakers and educational panels addressing current industry topics.”

A large portion of the private treaty sales tend to come from southern customers in Texas and Oklahoma.

“We have a big following where they’re really looking to improve genetics,” Hermes says. “Some of our best customers for the last five years have been south. We had a ranch last year where about 300 head of bred heifers went to in south Texas.”

His advice to marketing bred heifers is to start with a high-quality animal.

“It doesn’t matter if you’re selling five over 500,” Hermes says. “Sort through them and don’t just breed every one of them. Make sure you get them pelvic-measured, and tract-scored. Do a quality sort for docility and phenotype. If you’re planning to AI them or if you’re going to buy a bull, use a sire that is really current and recognizable. Everybody really likes to know what the cattle are bred to, so I recommend finding a calving ease sire. If you buy them as replacements find out as much information as you can about the genetics.”

His best marketing tactic has been repeat buyers and word of mouth.

“We get more and more phone calls from repeat buyers and their neighbors and that’s how we’ve done a majority of our marketing,” Hermes concludes. “We have grown our brand and sales through positive feedback.”

Your Next Reads:

A Life Built on Genetics, People and Purpose

Mon, 30 Mar 2026 17:40:55 GMT

When you ask Lorna Marshall how she built a 30-year career at the center of the beef genetics world, she doesn’t start with titles, company names or big industry deals. She starts with people.

“The thing I’m most proud of,” she says, “are easily the relationships I’ve built — with bull owners, sales reps, team members and industry leaders.”

That simple emphasis on relationships and culture is the thread that runs through Marshall’s journey from a Kansas 4-H member to one of the most influential voices in beef genetics and sire acquisition.

(Provided by Lorna Marshall)

From Junior Leader to Industry Connector

Marshall grew up on a small cattle farm near Valley Center, Kan., where she recalls early experiences in 4‑H and the American Junior Simmental Association helped shape her future.

She describes her participation in junior programs as educational-based — opportunities that developed her curiosity and drive. It also placed her in the orbit of key Kansas industry leaders like Bob Dickinson, Ansel Armstrong and Michael Dikeman. Their work in performance-based beef cattle selection lit a spark in Marshall. Add to that her love of livestock judging and competition, and Marshall quickly found herself on a path that blended science, performance data and people.

She attended Colby Community College where she served as student body president and competed on the livestock judging team. The 1989 Kansas Community College Student of the Year, Marshall transferred to K-State where she was a Block & Bridle officer and a member of the 1990 reserve national champion livestock judging team.

Marshall says judging not only sharpened her eye for cattle, but it also expanded her network, something she credits as “what got me to where I am in my career.”

“An animal breeding professor at Kansas State, Dr. Linda Martin, was someone that I not only loved her class but also really admired her teaching style, how she built relationships with and motivated students,” Marshall says. “I followed in her footsteps when I chose to complete a master’s degree in animal breeding and genetics at Colorado State University.”

Marshall studied under Jim Brinks, whom she calls “very science-based, but very applied — always focused on what’s most important for the producer.”

While at CSU, an internship with ABS Global gave her a front-row seat to the artificial insemination (AI) industry. She started as a GTS evaluator, learning AI from the inside at a time when the beef industry’s use of reproductive technology and performance data was accelerating.

(Provided by Lorna Marshall)

Her Path in Genetics

After a brief stint at a breed association, ABS called her back — and that’s where one pivotal moment quietly shaped her career.

In 1995, ABS leadership turned to Marshall and asked her to oversee sire acquisition. She credits the opportunity to her network in the seedstock industry. Her role in sire acquisition gave her the opportunity to use her knowledge of genetics combined with her natural talent as a connector.

Over the next 16 years at ABS, she built deep relationships across multiple breeds, breed associations and regions. She also began traveling internationally, learning where U.S. beef genetics fit within the global beef supply chain.

She moved to Genex in 2011, shifting her focus more toward marketing, key accounts and large herds. There, she dug deeper into the sales process and started working more in the beef-on-dairy space, where large entities were experimenting with new supply chain models and genetic strategies.

About four and a half years later, Select Sires called and offered her the role she currently serves in: vice president of beef programs.

At Select, she has a chance to integrate everything she’s learned: training, people management and development, acquisition, marketing and product management.

“It was really the opportunity for me to put together everything I had learned in my career,” she summarizes.

(Provided by Lorna Marshall)

A Career Grounded in Cattle and Family

Marshall’s credibility in genetics isn’t just academic or corporate. It’s rooted in a lifetime of raising cattle with her husband, Troy.

The two met at CSU, married and have been together 34 years.

“I think Troy is one of the greatest visionaries in the beef industry; he always is challenging the status quo, and he makes me think bigger and more forward-facing, which I feel has served me extremely well in my career,” she says.

Early on, the couple bought cows together — even before they got married — and eventually built Marshall Cattle Co., a registered Angus and Simmental operation in eastern Colorado. For 20 years, they hosted an annual bull sale and raised their three children in the cow-calf and seedstock world.

“During that time, we’ve had over 20 interns live with us,” Marshall says. “It’s been rewarding to see them succeed. I think every single one of them would tell you that no meal at our dinner table was complete without discussing some current beef industry topic.”

As Marshall advanced through AI companies, most of which are based in dairy country, she negotiated remote work long before it was common. When their first son was born in 1996, she secured a remote office so she could live in beef country and stay close to the cattle and her family.

That dual life — corporate AI leader and hands-on seedstock producer — sharpened her perspective.

“You are better at bull selection if you are a producer,” she says. “You understand all of the problems firsthand. Sometimes the problems aren’t fully described by EPDs on a piece of paper.”

Living and working in the harsh eastern Colorado environment also gave her a practical perspective of how genetics perform in the real world — not just on paper or in theory.

In 2020, the couple chose more family time and dispersed their seedstock herd.

“Our kids decided to go to college in Oklahoma and Texas, and it kind of got to the point where I love cows, but I love my family more,” she says. “That’s really what made us transition to less cows… and more family time.”

Today, the couple resides near Prague, Okla., and has a small commercial cow herd.

(Provided by Lorna Marshall)

What Makes a Leader: Culture, Fit and Development

Across ABS, Genex and Select Sires, Marshall has managed teams, mentored young professionals and helped shape corporate strategy.

“Lorna is a great leader because she cares about others,” says Ryan Bodenhausen, Select Sires associate vice president of beef product development and marketing. “She is the first to give credit and praise to teammates before herself.”

Marshall says her leadership philosophy is simple and people-focused:

1. Culture comes first

“I’ve experienced culture — both good and bad,” she says. “It’s probably one of the most important things to me. We work really hard on culture.”

For Marshall, culture isn’t a slogan. It’s the day-to-day environment her team works in, and she takes responsibility for making it a place where people want to stay and grow.
Bodenhausen says Marshall is very thoughtful and genuine, often sending gifts or handwritten letters as a sign of appreciation or to be uplifting in a time of need.

2. Hire the person, train the job

Marshall is convinced she can train someone to do the job, but she cannot train core character. She looks for:

The right character and values
Strong work ethic
A teachable attitude
A fit with the team’s culture

3. Invest in people more than product

One of the most fulfilling parts of her role now is coaching and help develop young people. Lauren Kimble, Select Sires manager of ProfitSource supply chains, is one of the young professionals Marshall has mentored.

“In our company leadership trainings, we are always asked to think of someone in our organization who embodies a given example, whether it be communication, listening, change management, or so forth,” Kimble says. “Every single time, the first person that pops into my head is Lorna.”

She adds, “I think it’s rare to encounter someone who has both technical and subject matter expertise and also just ‘gets’ people on a deeper level. Lorna has taught me much in both areas and genuinely takes interest in developing people.”

Marshall credits her career and passion for mentoring to her mentors Calvin Drake, who insisted she be treated as an equal as the only woman on her K-State livestock judging team, Dave Spears, Dave Nichols, Larry Corah, Jim Brinks and especially Willie Altenberg, who hired her at ABS and later brought her to Genex and whom she eventually recruited to Select Sires.

From Altenberg, she learned how to accept challenging feedback and turn it into growth.

“He was the first person to really give me performance reviews and coached me. I learned how to take constructive feedback which fueled my development. Willie’s developed lots of leaders in our industry; I’m very proud to be one of the many,” she says.

Today, she sees that investment as something she’s obligated to pay forward.

Rethinking Sire Acquisition: Diversity Over Ego

In sire acquisition, it’s tempting to believe success comes from having a “gifted eye” and anointing the next great bull. Marshall has a more grounded view.

“One of the biggest things I’ve learned is the power of diversity,” she says. “I don’t have to love every bull personally. It may not be a bull I would personally use, but if it serves a market, we need it.”

At Select Sires, that philosophy has shaped an acquisition strategy built around:

Understanding different markets
Matching specific genetics to specific needs
Offering the best bull for each market, not just one ideal type

Her favorite stories aren’t about famous sires as much as they are about the people behind them. She loves telling the story of Mytty In Focus at ABS — a bull that became a No. 1 registration sire for three up-and-coming Montana breeders.

“It changed their lives,” she says. “That’s just really cool to see — when we can change somebody’s life by helping to market their life’s work.”

Growth of Beef-on-Dairy

“One of the things I have been unable to change in my tenure is the amount or the adoption of artificial insemination in the beef cattle world,” Marshall says.

While use of AI in beef herds has remained stable, Marshall has been at the center of the beef-on-dairy shift. She has worked through the industry’s major structural change: beef moving from a side business in AI to a revenue driver.

She says historically, beef was 5% to 10% of an AI company’s income. Today, with beef-on-dairy, she estimates beef is 30% to 40% of revenue at many AI companies. She’s been in roles that touched both seedstock and beef-on-dairy supply chains, giving her a panoramic view of how genetics, packers and retailers are aligning.

Read More about Marshall’s philosophy about beef-on-dairy:

How Beef and Dairy Genetics Are Smarter and More Profitable

As the national beef cow herd is at a 75-year low, Marshall suggests AI and the use of sexed semen can help producers create the genetics that can excel either as a cow or as a feeder.

“I think we need to be focused on maternal traits to rebuild the cow herd,” Marshall says. “We can use sexed semen to create those females with specific genetics for maternal function. And then I think we can maximize quality pounds that we’re sending to the packer by, again, utilizing sexed semen and really elite terminal genetics.”

Looking Ahead: Data, Access and Opportunity

Despite the progress in AI, genomics and supply chains, Marshall’s biggest concern is who will control genetic information in the future. She sees two paths:

A “dairy model” with an open, multi-breed database where data are shared and improvement is accelerated.
A “swine model” dominated by a few large entities with private databases, limiting access and flexibility for independent and young producers.

She worries that without broader initiatives for more shared datasets and open genetic evaluations, our industry will look different with increased consolidation and less access to the necessary genetic information to remain competitive.

At the same time, she’s genuinely excited about sensor technologies, wearables and artificial intelligence-driven data collection that can unlock new traits — calf livability, vigor, red meat yield predictions and other objective phenotypes — without adding labor.

“I think we’re going to be able to solve problems we’ve been working on for 20 years in two years,” she predicts.

Marshall’s story isn’t just about genetics, AI companies or even technology. It’s about a woman who quietly built a career by staying rooted in cows, family and people, and who thinks that the real legacy in the beef business is measured in relationships, opportunity and the next generation coming up behind you.

Marshall’s 3 Strategies For Seedstock Success

Her advice to seedstock producers is consistent and grounded in being yourself and serving your customers.

Don’t copy someone else’s program. She sees too many new breeders trying to be a clone of who they admire. “Create your own path,” she explains. “One of the biggest problems I see in the seedstock industry is that new entrants come in and try to emulate a program they admire without a clear vision of what will differentiate their program.”
Breed cattle you believe in and that you like. The business is too hard to be passionate about something you don’t love.
Listen to your customers. The top programs, in her view, are the ones that: Take great care of customers and treat customer feedback as a primary guide to what works and what doesn’t.

She encourages a practical, relationship-driven philosophy rather than a “chase the hottest EPD profile” mindset.

“The seedstock producers that are the most successful are the ones that take really good care of their customers and listen to their customers,” she says. “So many times, I think in the seedstock world, we think we know more than our customer knows, and it needs to be the other way around.”

Genomics and the Evolving Role of the Bovine Veterinarian

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 18:58:16 GMT

Genomic testing is gaining traction in the beef industry, but for many producers, adoption still feels out of reach. The tools are available and the data is powerful, but the starting point is often unclear.

Increasingly, producers are looking to their veterinarians for guidance. The challenge is that many veterinarians are still defining what their role in genomics should look like.

Insights from Dr. Kirk Ramsey, professional services veterinarian, and Kelsey Luebbe, genomics technical services scientist, both with Neogen, highlight both the opportunity and the uncertainty shaping this shift.

An Expanding Role for a Trusted Voice

Producers have no shortage of information about genomics. Industry media, technical specialists and webinars all contribute to awareness, but when it comes time to make decisions, veterinarians remain a trusted source.

That trust is rooted less in genomics expertise and more in long-standing relationships and a deep understanding of herd performance. Veterinarians already play a central role in decision-making on many operations. Genomics is simply extending that role into new territory.

For many practitioners, genomics aligns closely with work they are already doing.

Veterinarians advise on heifer selection, evaluate bulls and track reproductive performance over time. They understand how cattle perform within a specific environment and how past decisions continue to influence current outcomes. This perspective is increasingly valuable as genomic data becomes part of the conversation.

“We have to be very diligent about looking for opportunities to expand our consulting realm because we have to maintain a capacity to provide value to our customers, especially as technology comes on and is moving forward,” Ramsey says.

Rather than focusing solely on treatment and prevention, veterinarians are being pulled into more strategic discussions, helping producers evaluate trade-offs and set long-term direction.

“We have to be on top of understanding what’s out there, understanding how we can provide value, and then at the same time, trying to be more than just the traditional veterinarian that we have always been. Maybe dive in a little bit more and leverage our capacity to understand the production systems and new technologies, helping our customers be progressive.” Ramsey adds.

This adjustment does not replace traditional services, but builds on them.

The Confidence Gap

Despite this opportunity, many veterinarians do not feel fully prepared to lead genomic discussions.

“As a veterinarian, I had no idea that my producers were looking to me for genetic advice. I knew they were looking to me for treatment advice, vaccination protocols or maybe even general production type questions, but I didn’t realize I actually had that much influence over whether they would even look in the genomic direction,” Ramsey says.

There is a growing awareness that expectations have changed, even if training has not fully kept pace.

“We don’t have a ton of training as veterinarians on genomics,” Ramsey begins. “It was a class we took at 6:30 a.m. back in undergrad, but I don’t feel like I learned a lot more in the DVM program.”

At the same time, industry organizations and companies are beginning to expand continuing education and develop resources to support veterinarians in this space.

The knowledge gap exists, but it is narrowing.

(Vernon Bewley - Neogen)

A Practical Entry Point

For veterinarians, stepping into genomics does not require mastering every detail of the technology. It starts with approaching it the same way they approach other herd-level decisions.

“If somebody comes and says, ‘Hey, I want to start testing,’ the first thing is to establish the goals. What are you trying to accomplish? Where are we headed? What are the things that we can help you identify? Where are the hurdles that you currently are facing and how can we help you move past them?” Ramsey says.

1. Start with herd goals, not genomic tests

Genomics is most useful when it is tied to a defined objective. Without that context, even strong data has limited value.

“Sometimes that conversation stalls because ‘What are your goals?’ is such a huge, open-ended question. So we reframe it: Where are you making money? Where are you losing money? Or, where does it really bother you that you’re losing money? That’s where we start,” Luebbe says.

Framing the conversation around economics makes it more actionable.

2. Use what you already know about the herd

Veterinarians bring years of observation and data to the table. Genomics adds another layer, helping explain patterns and refine decisions rather than replacing existing knowledge.

3. Lean on available resources

While genomics-specific training for veterinarians is still developing, practical information is available through industry partners, genomic companies and professional organizations.

4. Focus on interpretation, not promotion

The veterinarian’s value lies in helping producers understand and apply results, not in selling a specific test.

5. Integrate genomics into existing decision points

Genomics fits naturally into decisions already being made, including replacement selection, breeding strategies and long-term planning.

What Getting Started Looks Like for Producers

For producers, the biggest barrier to adoption is often uncertainty, not resistance.

A practical starting point is to focus on a defined group of animals tied to an immediate decision, such as replacement heifers. This allows genomic data to be applied directly without overcomplicating the process. Luebbe suggests making the process fun can be a good entry point.

“Test the animals that you’re arguing about with your brother,” Luebbe says. “Whether it’s the whole bunch, the bottom 50% or the top 25%. Do it so that you can gain some additional information to help you make better decisions.”

Optimally, testing should represent the whole group being evaluated rather than a small subset of top-performing animals, ensuring the results provide a meaningful picture.

Genomics works best alongside visual assessment and experience. It adds insight into differences that are not always visible but does not replace practical knowledge.

The Growing Intersection of Genetics and Health

While genomics has traditionally focused on production and maternal traits, its role is expanding into health.

“We’re starting to bring more health-driven traits to the table. Using genomics to understand the capacity of the immune system for the animal and their genetic risk of developing bovine respiratory disease or congestive heart failure. We’re starting to see this change in the industry and leveraging genomics to understand what health concerns our cattle might be having,” Ramsey says.

This shift strengthens the connection between genomics and veterinary expertise, creating new opportunities to improve herd resilience and reduce disease risk through selection. As these tools evolve, veterinarians will play a key role in helping producers interpret and apply this information effectively.

A Shift Already Underway

Genomics is no longer a future concept. It is a tool that is steadily becoming part of everyday decision making.

“Genomics will never replace a producer’s understanding of their cattle,” Ramsey says. “But what it can do is uncover that layer hidden underneath the skin and identify the genetic capacity that they’re actually bringing.”

For veterinarians, the shift is already happening. Producers are asking questions, expectations are evolving and data is becoming part of routine conversations. The opportunity is not to become an expert in every aspect of genomics, but to build on the role veterinarians already hold.

Getting started does not require having all the answers. It requires stepping into the conversation and helping move it forward.

Balancing the Scale: Matching Genetics to Your Forage Resources

Mon, 23 Mar 2026 16:22:03 GMT

Advancements in genetics, management and nutrition have allowed the U.S. beef industry to sustain — and even increase at times — total beef production with a progressively smaller cow herd (Figure 1). Put simply, each breeding cow now produces offspring that generate more beef each year.

Figure 1: U.S. calf crop numbers continue to drop. The downward trend continues from 1977 to 2025.

(UNL)

The downward trend continues from 1977 to 2025. This trend has been driven largely by increased days on feed but is supported by greater genetic potential for growth. Expectedly, hot carcass weights have continuously risen by roughly four pounds per year (approximately seven pounds of live weight annually) (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Steer carcass weights continue to trend upward, from 1977 to 2024.

(UNL)

In many production systems, daughters of bulls purchased to transmit growth and carcass traits are retained as replacements (Figure 3). When matings are designed primarily to maximize feeder calf or feedlot performance, the resulting replacement females may inadvertently reduce efficiency and profitability at the cow-calf level.

Figure 3: Weaning weights, yearling weights and cow size (maternal weights) trended upward in the Angus breed from 1972 to 2024.

(UNL)

Assessing Bulls Within the Management Scheme

For beef producers who market calves at weaning, bull selection typically emphasizes growth traits such as weaning weight (WW) and yearling weight (YW), with consideration given to milk production in daughters. To illustrate how these traits interact with herd objectives, consider the following bulls, commercial cow herd (Table 1), and resulting progeny (Table 2):

Table 1. Example bulls’ and cow herd’s weaning weights, yearling weights, maternal milk and maternal weights:

Animal(s)	WW¹	YW²	MM³	MW⁴
Bull A	70	130	33	107
Bull B	35	62	21	41
Cow herd	50	80	25	55

¹Weaning weight ²Yearling weight ³Maternal milk ⁴Mature weight

Table 2. Planned mating EPDs are calculated as the average of sire and dam EPDs:

Animal(s)	WW	YW	MM	MW
Progeny A	60	105	29	81
Progeny B	42.5	71	23	48

Based strictly on EPDs, progeny from Bull A are clearly superior for growth, milk and mature weight. For a producer who sells all calves as feeders and/or yearlings, Bull A would likely be the preferred option. However, this decision becomes less straightforward when replacement females are retained.

Impacts of Mature Weight and Milking Potential on Feed Costs

Profitability can be expressed as:
Revenue – Expenses = Profit (or Loss)

When replacement females are retained, genetics influence not only revenue through calf performance but also expenses, particularly feed costs. Bull A is expected to sire daughters that are both larger at maturity and higher milking. Both traits increase nutrient requirements, primarily by increasing dry matter intake.

In general, larger cows consume more feed than smaller cows. While outliers exist, management decisions are typically based on averages, and average cow weight still stands as an effective tool for intake estimation. Average cow body weight can be estimated effectively using past cull cow scale tickets; accuracy improves with multiple years of records.

Milk production is also energetically costly (Figure 4). Higher-milking cows require more energy not only during lactation but throughout the production cycle, as milk potential is positively associated with overall maintenance energy requirements. Thus, increased milk and increased mature size exert additive pressure on feed demand. Both maintenance and lactation are at higher priority for nutrient partitioning than rebreeding.

Figure 4: Cows that produce more milk, also require more energy.

(UNL Beef Watch)

More energy is required not only during lactation, but throughout the production cycle. Genetic potential for milk or growth will only be expressed when overall management can support the increase in nutrient demands. Without supplementation, in more limited environments, expected gains in calf weaning weight may be reduced, as environmental constraints limit nutrient intake and restrict milk production despite increased grazing pressure.

Whether these added costs are justified depends on whether additional calf revenue offsets higher feed expenses. A 2019 meta-analysis by Lalman et al. reported that each additional pound of cow mature weight resulted in only 0.06 lb. of additional calf weaning weight. Accordingly, a 1,400-lb. cow would be expected to wean approximately 6 lb. more calf weight than a 1,300-lb cow. At a favorable calf price of $4.50 per lb., this equates to $27 of additional revenue.

Using National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) equations, maintaining 100 lb. of additional mature cow weight requires roughly 600 lb of high-quality grass hay or equivalent grazed forage annually. At $90 per ton forage (excluding waste and feeding costs), this places the breakeven forage cost near the value of the added calf weight.

In Nebraska — where grazed forage is among the most expensive in the nation — 600 lb. of forage (approximately 0.75 animal unit months) would cost an estimated $32 to $47 based on regional lease rates reported in UNL’s Annual Land Value Report. This exceeds the value of the additional calf weight, even before accounting for increased intake associated with greater milk production.

Conclusion

Even amid strong calf markets, increased feed costs associated with larger, higher-milking cows often outweigh the marginal gains in calf value. While the short-term benefits of bull selection are readily apparent when feeders are sold, the long-term consequences of retaining replacement females may not be fully realized until those females reach mature size— often five years after birth.

Therefore, when replacement retention is a key component of the production system, selecting bulls with moderate mature weight and milk EPDs may better support long-term cow-calf efficiency and profitability by reducing unnecessary feed costs and maintaining the level of performance the operation’s resources can realistically support.

— Josie Crouch and Brock Ortner University of Nebraska extension educators co-authored this article for UNL BeefWatch

Why Bigger Cows Aren't the Only Reason for Record Carcass Weights

Fri, 20 Mar 2026 15:20:23 GMT

Mature cow body weight has increased by an average of 7.7 lb. per year in the last 60 years. Recently, the industry has focused attention on the large increases in hot carcass weight (HCW) observed in 2024 and 2025; HCW increased by more than 20 lb. and 24 lb., respectively. Producers often assume that heavier carcasses are simply the result of larger cows, but the relationship between the two is more modest than many expect.

Hot carcass weight has increased at an average rate of about 4.8 lb. per year over time. The rate of increase differs slightly between sexes, with heifer carcass weights increasing about 0.8 lb. per year faster than steers (Figure 1).

(Oklahoma State)

While the recent increases in 2024 and 2025 appear dramatic, they are not unprecedented. Similar year-to-year jumps occurred in 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2012, 2015 and 2020, showing that periodic spikes in carcass weight are part of a longer-term pattern.

Looking at national data provides a similar perspective (Figure 2). The amount of carcass weight produced per 100 lb. of cow body weight has increased only gradually (0.12 lb. per year). In the early 1960s, cattle produced about 60 lb. of hot carcass weight for every 100 lb. of cow body weight. Today that figure averages around 69 lb. per 100 lb. of cow weight — an increase of only about 9 lb. over the past 66 years.

(Oklahoma State)

An analysis of a research cow herd in Arkansas reported that carcass weight increased by about 0.3 lb. for each lb. increase in cow body weight. In other words, larger cows do tend to produce calves that finish with heavier carcasses, but cow size alone explains only a portion of the overall increase. As cows get larger, the efficiency of HCW production per cow bodyweight decreases.

This indicates that improvements in carcass weight are not driven solely by larger cows. Other factors play major roles, including genetic selection for growth and carcass traits, the use of growth-promoting technologies, improved nutrition and feeding management, and economic incentives in the cattle market. For example, tight cattle supplies and relatively small discounts for heavier carcasses have encouraged feedlots to feed cattle longer, allowing more weight to be added before harvest.

Bigger cows are only part of the carcass weight story for the beef industry. Increasing cow size is a very inefficient way to increase total beef production.

Your Next Read:
Is There an Optimum Cow Size?

Accurately Comparing Bulls: 2026 Adjustment Factors Released

Fri, 20 Mar 2026 11:08:46 GMT

A tool that has been in beef producer’s toolboxes since the 1970s has been expected progeny differences (EPDs). EPDs are a tool producers can utilize when comparing bulls within each breed for example birth weight, weaning weight or yearling weight. EPDs across different breeds and database cannot be directly compared because of differences in the genetic base.

Since 1993, the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC), a part of the USDA Agricultural Research Service, has produced a table of factors to adjust the EPDs of cattle so that the merit of individuals can be compared across breeds. The table allows producers to compare EPDs from multiple breeds can be compared by adding/subtracting the appropriate adjustment factors to the EPDs resulting from the most recent genetic evaluations for each of 18 breeds.

“The AB-EPDs are most useful to commercial producers purchasing bulls of more than one breed to use in crossbreeding programs,” says Larry Kuehn, USMARC. “For example, in terminal crossbreeding systems, AB-EPDs can identify bulls in different breeds with high growth potential or favorable carcass characteristics.”

Each year USMARC releases updated tables . The factors are derived by estimating breed differences from the USMARC germplasm evaluation program and adjusting these differences for the EPDs of the sires that were sampled in the system. Traits for which factors are estimated are birth weight, weaning weight, yearling weight, maternal weaning weight (milk), marbling score, ribeye area, backfat depth (fat), and carcass weight.

Kuehn says the yearling weight EPD adjustment factors are derived using a BIF-adjusted postweaning gain and weaning weight as separate traits which is consistent with most national cattle evaluations. Thus, these factors directly relate to EPDs from national cattle evaluations.

The adjustment factors in Table 1 were updated using EPDs from the most recent national cattle evaluations conducted by each of the 18 breed associations (current as of January 2026).

As an example, suppose a Red Angus bull has a carcass weight EPD of + 20.0 lb., and a Hereford bull has a carcass weight EPD of + 72.0 lb. The across-breed adjustment factors for carcass weight EPD (see Table 1) are -3.8 lb. for Red Angus and -68.2 lb. for Hereford. The AB-EPD is 20.0 lb. – 3.8 lb. = 16.2 lb. for the Red Angus bull and 72.0 lb. – 68.2 = 3.8 lb. for the Hereford bull. The expected carcass weight difference of offspring when both are mated to cows of another breed would be 16.2 lb. – 3.8 lb. = 12.4 lb.

Kuehn reminds producers it is important to note that the table factors (Table 1) do not represent a direct comparison among the different breeds because of base differences between the breeds.

“They should only be used to compare the EPDs (AB-EPDs) of animals in different breeds,” he says.

To reduce confusion, means on a EPD scale are presented in Table 2. The EPD scale, which is one half of the genetic effect, is used because they are the expected differences from using these animals as a sire. These means are also called ‘breed of sire means” meaning the effects expected from using average animals from each breed as a sire.

Study Reveals How Bull Buyers Use Key Genetic Information

Thu, 19 Mar 2026 15:28:26 GMT

A first-of-its-kind study using eye-tracking technology has revealed when commercial producers shop for bulls, they overwhelmingly focus on an animal’s physical appearance and basic production traits and often overlook economic selection indexes designed to improve their buying accuracy.

The multistate research project, led by University of Tennessee agricultural economist Charley Martinez examined how the layout of expected progeny difference (EPD) profiles affects buyers’ ability to accurately predict bull prices and assess quality.

“Our results show that how you present genetic information matters,” Martinez says. “Producers who used more detailed tools, like EPD rankings and genomically enhanced EPDs, were more likely to make accurate pricing decisions. But many buyers aren’t even looking at those indexes in the first place.”

Testing Layouts, Tracking Eyes

The study involved 208 producers from Tennessee, Alabama, West Virginia and Iowa. Participants were asked to view videos of 18 actual sale bulls — six each of Angus, Simmental and Hereford — along with corresponding EPD profiles. They then predicted each bull’s selling price.

To measure attention, an infrared eye-tracking bar was calibrated for each participant. Heat maps later revealed exactly where on the screen participants focused.

Researchers tested four different EPD profile layouts: a traditional format with percentile ranks, the same layout without percentile ranks, an inverted format placing economic indexes first and an inverted format without percentile ranks.

Across all treatments, average pricing accuracy ranged from 21% to 26%, with the inverted layout including percentile ranks producing the most accurate results.

Iowa Stands Out, While Risk-Takers Miss the Mark

The data revealed several notable patterns:

Iowa producers consistently outperformed participants from the other three states, being 23.8% more likely to predict prices accurately.
Users of genomically enhanced EPDs and EPD rankings were significantly more accurate, with a combined likelihood of being correct nearly 35% higher than those who did not use these tools.
Risk-tolerant participants tended to be wrong more often, while those willing to delay gratification — suggesting a long-term investment mindset — scored higher on accuracy.
Trust mattered, as producers who placed greater importance on trusting a breeder were more accurate in their price predictions.

Phenotype Dominates Decision-Making

Despite the push from geneticists to use economic indexes as efficient decision-making tools, the study found they are rarely consulted. Eye-tracking from this research showed that:

97% of participants fixated on the bull’s phenotype.
Production EPDs like calving ease, birth weight and weaning weight were the most viewed genetic measures.
Economic indexes ranked lowest, with index percentile ranks viewed by just 11% of participants on average.

“When producers do look at indexes, it’s more often the raw number than the percentile ranking,” Martinez says. “That suggests we need more education on what those rankings mean and why they matter.”

Quality Differentiation and Pricing Patterns

The research also examined whether producers could correctly differentiate between high-, average- and low-quality bulls, and adjust their willingness to pay accordingly. While some buyers consistently overestimated or underestimated prices, many could still distinguish relative quality levels. Producers using more advanced genetic tools were better at making those distinctions.

“Our goal is that buyers allocate the most dollars toward the highest-quality animals and less toward average or low-quality bulls,” Martinez explained. “If they can identify quality but can’t nail the price, that’s still a valuable skill. It shows they understand relative worth.”

Implications for Breeders and Sales

The findings have clear takeaways for seedstock breeders, sale managers and breed associations.

Profile layout matters. Moving economic indexes to more prominent positions could improve buyer accuracy.
Education is crucial. Breeders and extension programs may need to emphasize the value and interpretation of indexes and percentile ranks.
Buyers should use all available tools. Phenotype alone provides an incomplete picture of an animal’s value.

“A repeat customer is the best kind of customer,” Martinez says. “The more confident they feel in their buying decision, the more likely they are to come back. Presenting genetic information in a way they’ll actually use is key to making that happen.”

Next Steps in Research

Martinez and his collaborators plan to further explore catalog design, potentially testing which layouts maximize the use of economic selection indexes.

“This is the first time anyone has proven that layout impacts accuracy in livestock buying decisions,” he says. “Now that we know it matters, the question is how to use that knowledge to help producers make better choices.”

The study also raises broader questions about decision-making in agriculture and how behavioral economics can inform extension programs, breed association policies and marketing strategies.

“In the end, the more informed the decision, the better the outcome for the producer,” Martinez says. “That benefits everyone in the supply chain.”

U.S. Bovine Semen Slipped 4% in 2025, Exports Hit Record $327M

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 19:06:22 GMT

Even with a major export market disappearing early in the year, the U.S. bovine genetics industry proved its resilience in 2025.

New data from the National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB) , which represents roughly 95% of the U.S. artificial insemination industry, shows total semen sales slipped about 4% in 2025 to just under 66 million units - a decline of 2.9 million compared with 2024, effectively giving back last year’s modest gain. However, the industry offset much of that loss through stronger beef demand, expanded export markets and continued shifts in dairy breeding strategies.

China Closes Doors, Global Markets Evolve

In February 2025, U.S. bovine semen exports to China came to an abrupt standstill after Chinese authorities halted the issuance of required veterinary health certificates, cutting off one of the industry’s key export channels. The disruption stemmed from regulatory and trade tensions, not animal health concerns. Without the certificates, U.S. exporters had to redirect product to other markets.

“While dairy unit exports were down due to the closure of the China market, exports to other countries increased, which significantly reduced the impact of the closure,” says Jay Weiker, president of NAAB.

Even with China offline, robust interest from Europe, Brazil, North Africa and South Asia helped steady the export picture.

“The industry not only stabilized but continued to advance by strengthening long-standing markets and opening new ones,” says NAAB international program director Sophie Eaglen.

The closure of China also reshaped the list of top semen buyers by value. In 2025, the United Kingdom led the rankings, followed by Italy and Mexico. Brazil led in total units imported, followed by Mexico and Russia. Overall, 46 markets imported over $1 million in U.S. semen, accounting for 94% of export units and 95% of export value.

A Down Year for Dairy

The U.S. dairy semen market experienced a substantial decline in 2025, reflecting ongoing shifts in breeding strategies and global market pressures. Total dairy unit sales, including domestic, export and custom-collected units, fell 6% compared to 2024, a loss of roughly 3 million units, bringing the total to 45.8 million.

Despite the overall decline, domestic use showed a slight rebound, increasing 2% to 16.5 million units, or nearly 367,000 additional units. Sexed semen continued to dominate U.S. herds, rising 6% to 10.6 million units and now accounting for 64% of all dairy semen used domestically. Conventional dairy semen declined by 280,000 units, highlighting the continued trend toward precision breeding and genomic selection.

Exports for dairy semen totaled 28.3 million units, down about 2.5 million from 2024. The early-year closure of the China market contributed to the drop, but exports to other countries, particularly across Europe, Brazil, North Africa and South Asia, helped offset much of the lost volume. NAAB says strong international demand for replacement heifers continues to create opportunities for U.S. dairy producers.

Beef Semen Sees a Bump

The beef segment saw modest growth in 2025, reversing a multi-year decline. Total beef semen sales increased by 1%, or roughly 122,000 units, to reach 20.2 million units. Domestic use accounted for most of that growth, with beef units sold into beef herds rising 7% for the second consecutive year. In total, 9.8 million beef units were used domestically, with 8.1 million going into dairy herds and 1.7 million used in traditional beef herds.

Heterospermic beef semen, which combines genetics from multiple sires in a single straw, remains a significant portion of the market, though it declined from its 2024 peak of 2.8 million units to just over 2 million in 2025. Domestically, heterospermic units represented 2 million of the total, with 400,000 units exported. Angus remains the dominant beef breed, followed by crossbreeds and heterospermic products.

Export demand for beef genetics also continues to expand. Total beef semen exports grew 13% to 5.5 million units, underscoring the global appetite for U.S. genetics even as total semen unit exports declined overall.

Beef-on-Dairy Genetics Hold Steady

Beef-on-dairy genetics have become an increasingly important strategy for U.S. dairy producers, and 2025 was no exception. Domestic use remained steady at 8.1 million units, while exports of beef-on-dairy semen grew 13%, adding approximately 279,000 units.

This segment is fueled by genomic selection strategies that allow dairy producers to produce replacement heifers from their best animals while using beef sires on the remainder of the herd to create high-value F1 calves for feedlots. Adoption is also growing internationally, with rising demand for F1 calves and crossbred genetics, reinforcing the role of U.S. dairy producers in meeting both domestic and global needs.

Adaptive Trends and Future Opportunities

Despite the year’s unit declines, the industry is adjusting and finding its footing as global demand shifts and new breeding tools and market opportunities come along.

“Trends in semen usage reflect producers’ efforts to improve genetic outcomes and economic returns in an evolving marketplace,” Weiker says. “NAAB members should be complimented for their commitment to developing new markets and increasing market share in strategically important markets. There are many positives that can be gleaned from the 2025 results.”

With export value at record levels and beef-on-dairy strategies growing, the industry appears positioned for continued adaptation and progress in years ahead.

Three Non‑Negotiables for Selecting the Next Generation of Females

Mon, 09 Mar 2026 19:25:20 GMT

Beef producers today are surrounded by data — performance weights, expected progeny differences (EPDs), indexes, genomics and endless traits listed in bull sale catalogs. It’s easy to feel overwhelmed and hard to know where to focus. No matter how sophisticated the tools become, the core challenge stays the same: beef producers need cows whose genetics match the environment and management they put them in, and they need them to be profitable.

“Our goal should always be to combine excellent genetics with excellent environment in order to enable that animal to express their true genetic potential,” says Jamie Courter, University of Missouri beef extension specialist.

She says the process starts with a genetic business plan or clear breeding objective.

“No business goes into a bank and asks for a loan without a business plan,” she says. “A breeding objective is no different. It’s just the genetic business plan that you have for your operation. You shouldn’t buy bulls or select replacements without knowing how your genetics are supposed to make money.”

She says producers need to consider:

Are you selling calves at weaning?
Holding them to yearling?
Retaining ownership to the rail and selling on a grid?

Each path points toward different economically relevant traits:

Weaning weight
Yearling weight
Carcass quality and yield

She says it is important to also consider these indirect economic traits:

Docility
Feed efficiency
Mature cow size
Structural soundness, udders, feet and legs

“Once you’ve outlined those economic drivers, there are three foundational traits I consider non‑negotiable when selecting the next generation of beef females,” Courter stresses. “Mature cow weight, hair shedding and calving ease.”

She explains these traits affect both biological efficiency and the ability of a female to thrive in her environment.

1. Mature Cow Weight

The industry has paid a lot of attention to weaning and yearling weights, but much less to what has quietly been happening to mature cow size. Across breeds, genetic trends show mature cow weight has been pushed higher and higher over time.

“As an industry, we have not been paying attention to it,” she explains regarding mature cow weight. “We have been driving not only the genetic merit, but the actual mature weight of our U.S. cow herd higher and higher, and from an efficiency and a profitability standpoint, there are a lot of problems with that.”

She says bigger cows eat more, require more forage per pair and may simply not fit a producer’s resource base or stocking rate.

Mature cow weight is not inherently good or bad, but it must fit the environment and management. A 1,600 lb. cow on marginal grass in a low‑input system is a very different proposition than a similar cow in a high‑input, irrigated environment.

She adds if you ignore mature weight, you may find your “better” genetics are actually eroding profitability because your cows require more feed than your operation can economically provide.

2. Hair Shedding

Courter says hair shedding is one of the simplest, yet most powerful, adaptation traits the industry has largely overlooked. It measures how quickly a cow gets rid of her winter hair coat in late spring and early summer.

She explains the cows are scored on a 1–5 scale, where 1 is a slick summer coat and 5 is a full winter coat, with the others in between.

Why does this matter? In hot, humid environments or where endophyte‑infected fescue is common — like much of Missouri and the fescue belt — cows that hold onto their winter coat longer suffer more heat stress. Heat‑stressed cows are less likely to breed back early, produce less milk and wean lighter calves.

Research by the University of Missouri using data on about 14,000 Simmental and SimAngus cows from across the U.S. showed earlier‑shedding cows have a clear economic advantage. On the same scoring date, cows that scored a 1 (slick) weaned calves that were, on average, 45 lb. heavier than those from cows scored as 5 (full winter coat).

She emphasizes at today’s calf prices, 45 lb. of weaning weight is real money.

3. Calving Ease (CE)

Courter strongly recommends selecting bulls on calving ease EPDs, not birth weight EPD or actual birth weight. Many producers still say they want “low birth weight bulls,” especially for heifers. But what they really want is fewer difficult births. Selecting solely on birth weight often misses that goal.

Birth weight EPD simply predicts pounds of birth weight. Calving ease EPDs (direct and maternal) predict the probability of unassisted births in first‑calf heifers or their daughters.

The data show a big difference: “The correlation between birth weight and percent of unassisted births is .24,” Courter says. “If we look at the relationship between calving ease and percent of unassisted births, that genetic correlation is .9. Selection for low birth weight does not ensure calving ease. It just ensures low birth weight calves and all the problems that go along with that.”

There is also an intermediate optimum. Looking at Red Angus data, she says once calving ease direct reaches about +14, you already have roughly a 95% chance of unassisted calving in heifers. Pushing to extreme calving ease levels doesn’t buy much additional benefit and may create trade‑offs in growth and other traits.

She stresses mature cows, in particular, don’t need “heifer bull” levels of calving ease.

Her message to producers is when buying bulls and planning matings for replacements, base decisions on calving ease EPDs appropriate to heifers versus cows, not just a low-birth-weight number.

Courter’s three non‑negotiables — mature cow weight, hair shedding and calving ease — won’t tell you everything about a female, but together they provide a powerful foundation for building cows that truly fit a producer’s environment and business plan.

From there, she encourages producers to use growth, carcass and maternal EPDs — plus selection indexes and, if you choose genomic tools — to fine‑tune their cow herd toward a specific breeding objective. But remember, the goal isn’t perfection: “The perfect animal doesn’t exist, right? But we have to use the tools and the information that we have to get as close as possible.”

Precision Genomics: The Veterinarian’s Role in Commercial Herd Rebuilding

Tue, 03 Mar 2026 18:38:03 GMT

With the U.S. beef herd at historic lows , rebuilding is no longer just about numbers. It is about keeping the right females. Today, every retained replacement heifer represents years of genetic influence, input costs and production risk. For the bovine practitioner, this is an opportunity to move beyond traditional “chute-side technician” roles and become a strategic data consultant. Selection is no longer just about phenotype; it is about mitigating biological and economic risks.

The following strategies for precision genomics are pulled from a deep-dive discussion with Dr. Kent Andersen and Dr. Tom Short on The Bovine Vet Podcast . By pairing clinical experience with genomic tools, practitioners can better navigate the current rebuilding phase.

Moving Beyond Visual Appraisal

Visual selection remains a cornerstone of cattle management. Structural soundness, disposition and obvious developmental concerns cannot be ignored. However, phenotype alone does not tell the whole story of an animal’s future productivity.

The Trap of Size: Selecting the largest heifers often inadvertently selects for higher maintenance requirements and increased feed intake.

“Traditionally, commercial cow-calf producers have selected their replacement heifers based on visual appraisal — and perhaps, the ones that are born earliest and just have the look of making a good cow,” says Andersen, director of global beef genetic technical services for Zoetis Animal Health. “Unfortunately, when you select based on looks and size, sometimes you’re picking the biggest ones. So, you’re picking the heifers that may turn out to be the bigger cows that have higher maintenance requirements.”

The Genomic Advantage: Genetic predictions provide insight into metabolic efficiency, fertility, and longevity before a single dollar is spent on development.

“There’s a lot of traits in the unseen world, such as cow fertility, intake, feed conversion, bovine respiratory disease health, that you really can’t gauge by just looking at them,” Andersen says. “The new tools allow the producer to pick heifers that are less risky of dropping out early and maybe not being very profitable.”

Clinical Genomics: Disease Risk and Wellness

One of the more significant recent advancements is the ability to generate genomic predictions related to disease risk, particularly bovine respiratory disease (BRD). Developing those metrics required assembling large populations of cattle with detailed health records and corresponding genotypes. Understanding the value of those predictions requires a clear understanding of heritability.

Heritability vs. Management: Genetics do not replace vaccinations, but they lower the baseline risk. Selecting for higher “Wellness” scores builds a more resilient herd that responds better to clinical protocols.

“Heritability is kind of a term a lot of people don’t understand in a way, but it’s basically just the amount of variation in a trait that we see that’s due to additive genetics, meaning that we can measure it, select for it and improve it,” says Short, associate director in outcomes research with Zoetis Animal Health.

The Data Gap: Historically, commercial heifers lacked the Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) available to seedstock. Genomic testing (e.g., Inherit Select) bridges this gap, providing EPD-level accuracy on unproven females.

“With this technology, we’re getting genetic predictions in commercial cattle that, if you think about it historically, have had very little, if any, information recorded on them,” Short says. “All the data recording and genetic selection and prediction and everything has really occurred at the seedstock level.”

By combining DNA information with national cattle evaluation systems, commercial heifers can now receive EPDs across a range of economically important traits, from fertility and growth to structural and health-related measures.

Managing Genetic Antagonisms

Selecting for a single trait, such as extreme growth, often comes at a cost to others, such as calving ease or fertility.

“Selecting to increase one trait may actually decrease another, but in an undesirable direction,” Short explains. “That’s where you have to weigh the two traits in an index appropriately, knowing that there’s antagonisms there.”

Economic Indices: Use weighted indices to manage these trade-offs. These tools balance production and maternal performance to ensure overall operation profitability rather than chasing outlier data points.

Precision Culling: Identifying “bottom-tier” genetics early allows producers to divert resources toward high-potential females, optimizing the client’s input costs and long-term sustainability.

The DVM as the “Trusted Adviser”

The veterinarian is often the most influential voice in a producer’s decision-making process, making them the ideal conduit for genomic integration.

“In our interactions with commercial cow-calf producers, it’s almost always the veterinarian that is the most trusted adviser,” Andersen says. “The veterinarian is helping them with their herd health program, so we think it’s a natural fit for the bovine practitioner to also assist with getting DNA collected and using the results.”

Short echoes that sentiment. “Most cow-calf herds that have a valid client-patient relationship with their veterinarian trust them as a resource, and especially when it comes to things like health and genetics, which are more technical aspects of what they have to do in their everyday jobs,” he says.

Workflow Integration: DNA collection via ear punch is easily integrated into routine pregnancy diagnosis, vaccination, or breeding soundness exams.

Consultative Value: By interpreting genomic results, veterinarians can guide mating strategies and marketing decisions—such as selling “value-added” replacements—strengthening the Veterinarian-Client-Patient Relationship (VCPR).

The Economic Reality of Genomic Testing

Early adopters in the commercial space are capturing disproportionate value in a tight market.

“Early adopters are the ones that get the biggest reward,“ Short says. “Not only am I going to select the very best heifers I test for my own replacements, I’ve got a next group here that are pretty good. I’m going to sell them as value-added replacements to my neighbors.”

Genomic testing, often costing between $15 and $40 per head, can lead to significantly higher lifetime returns by ensuring only the most efficient, fertile, and healthy females enter the breeding herd. While visual appraisal and experience are still important, pairing intuition with genomic insight defines the next generation of decision-making.

Summary for the Practitioner

“I think the sail has been set to evolve from real group herd-based to more individual animal-based in our selections, in our matings, in our management protocols, in our days on feed and harvest time protocols,” Andersen concludes. “The individual animal information, I think, paves the way for that.”

As the industry shifts toward individual animal management, genomic data is the next essential “diagnostic tool.” It allows the practitioner to move from managing groups to optimizing individuals, ultimately building a more profitable operation for the client.

To hear more from Andersen and Short on how genomics is redefining the commercial cow-calf industry, including more information on Inherit Select and the newly introduced BRD selection indices, listen to the full conversation on the latest episode of The Bovine Vet Podcast .

Zoetis to Acquire Neogen’s Animal Genomics Business

Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:12:11 GMT

Today, Neogen Corporation , an innovative leader in food safety solutions, announced it has entered into a definitive agreement to sell its global genomics business to Zoetis Inc. , the world’s leading animal health company, for $160 million, subject to customary closing adjustments.

Neogen’s planned divestiture, which had been previously announced, was part of the company’s portfolio review strategy to simplify the business and focus on core strategic markets.

“Neogen’s genomics business ( GeneSeek ) has been a pioneer in advanced DNA testing for livestock and has set a high standard for innovation across the livestock sector, with globally recognized solutions spanning genomic prediction, herd improvement and data integration,” says Tom Schultz, Neogen head of commercial global genomics."We’re excited to build on that foundation in our future with Zoetis and to continue advancing tools that strengthen animal health, performance and overall profitability. Customers can expect a thoughtful transition and continued excellent service,”

According to a Zoetis release , “This acquisition aligns directly with Zoetis’ strategy to drive future livestock innovation through genomics, reinforcing its commitment to livestock producers worldwide and advancing its precision animal health portfolio. By integrating Neogen’s genomic technologies and data solutions, Zoetis is expanding its capabilities to deliver predictive insights, individualized care and greater value to customers across major livestock and companion animal species.”

Neogen’s genomics business serves customers in more than 120 countries through its five laboratories in the U.S., Brazil, Australia, China and the United Kingdom, as well as an office location in Canada. The business leverages a comprehensive genotyping platform of fixed array and sequencing technologies, as well as software solutions that empower customers to make informed and data-driven decisions. The business is a leader in U.S. beef and dairy genomics , and its cutting-edge technologies enable highly accurate, scalable genetic testing and deeper insights into animal health, productivity and sustainability.

“This transaction is part of the company’s strategic portfolio review and allows the company to accelerate de-leveraging and improve profitability going forward,” says Mike Nassif, Neogen’s chief executive officer and president. “Furthermore, this deal allows us to focus in areas where the company has the most significant competitive advantage and further leverage our core capabilities in food and animal safety. We are committed to a smooth transition for customers, employees and other stakeholders, and believe the business is well positioned to thrive under Zoetis’ ownership.”

GeneSeek has been a pioneer in advanced DNA testing for livestock and companion animal industries, leveraging a global presence to deliver highly accurate, data-driven insights that contribute to improved animal performance and health, as well as profitability, in the beef, dairy and other industries. Through the flagship Igenity and GGP portfolio and rapid turnaround times, the business offers returns-focused genomic tools and globally recognized standards in genomic prediction to accelerate herd improvement and enable genomics trait screening. Supported by the Encompass platform for genomic data integration and strategic partnerships advancing DNA-backed traceability, GeneSeek is committed to continued innovation and scientific excellence.

“We’re excited to build on our innovative genomics portfolio offerings in our future with Zoetis and to continue advancing tools that strengthen overall animal health, performance, and profitability,” Schultz says. “At Zoetis, genomics becomes a core part of a company fully dedicated to animal health. Zoetis brings deep scientific capabilities, operational scale, and a long-term commitment to genetics and data.”

Jamie Brannan, Zoetis chief commercial officer, adds, “The addition of Neogen’s genomics business strengthens our commitment to advancing animal health through innovation, data and technology. As we continue to grow our leading innovative solutions in Precision Animal Health, this acquisition brings complementary capabilities that expand predictive insights and individualized care, enabling us to deliver added value to customers. Together, we are shaping the future of animal health, empowering customers with the tools they need to support healthier animals and sustainable livestock production globally.”

The transaction is expected to close by the end of the first half of the company’s 2027 fiscal year, subject to regulatory approval and customary closing conditions. The net proceeds from the transaction are expected to be used primarily for debt reduction. The Neogen genomics business generated approximately $90 million in sales during fiscal year 2025.

“At the time of the announcement, nothing will change,” Schultz explains. “Our customers’ contacts and ordering processes remain the same — products, services and support also remain the same. Customers can expect a thoughtful transition, continued service continuity, and future benefits from Zoetis’ focus in the business. Any changes will be communicated well in advance.”

Zoetis says it is committed to a seamless integration, supporting continuity for colleagues and customers, and building on Neogen’s legacy of innovation in genomics.

Beef-on-Dairy is Becoming a Bigger Engine for the Beef Supply Chain

Thu, 26 Feb 2026 20:58:55 GMT

Beef-on-dairy has become a significant part of the U.S. beef supply over the past decade, gaining momentum much like a freight train that keeps picking up speed. In fact, roughly 20% of today’s beef now traces back to a dairy cow, reflecting how integrated dairy production has become with the broader beef value chain.

And according to Matthew Cleveland of ABS Global and Nick Hardcastle of Cargill North America, that momentum shows no signs of slowing down.

“I think we’re all aware of the scope and magnitude of what beef-on-dairy has become and the significant role it plays within our beef supply chain today,” Cleveland noted during a panel at the 2026 National Cattlemen’s Beef Association conference.

He says the sector’s growth has also changed how the dairy and beef industries view one another. Rather than operating as separate segments, the lines between them have blurred.

“The dairy business is a big part of the beef business,” Cleveland says. “I don’t even like to separate them now. We’re all in the beef business, and we value partnership with our dairy producers.”

As beef-on-dairy has expanded, more attention has turned to decisions made on the dairy, where breeding choices directly influence how those calves perform all the way through the beef system.

Breeding With the Beef End in Mind

In the early days of beef-on-dairy, breeding decisions were driven largely by convenience rather than genetic intent. Beef semen was often selected based on price and availability rather than how those genetics would fit the needs of the beef sector.

“Before people really started thinking about beef sire genetics on dairy cows, there wasn’t much consideration for what those genetics actually were,” Cleveland says. “Most decisions came down to what semen was already in the tank or what was free. The main goal was simply getting the cow pregnant.”

That approach began to change as the industry started to see beef-on-dairy as a long-term genetic opportunity rather than just a reproductive tool.

“We began looking at beef‑on‑dairy more seriously from a genetic improvement standpoint around 2012,” Cleveland says. “We started to see the signals that beef-on-dairy was growing.”

Not long after, dedicated breeding programs were being developed across genetic companies to address the needs of both dairy producers and the beef supply chain. Today, Cleveland says those programs continue to evolve, with commercial performance data feeding back into genetic evaluations to drive ongoing improvement.

From ‘Black Holsteins’ to Beef-Calf Performance

During the early days of beef-on-dairy, crossbred calves exposed real challenges for the beef industry. Cleveland notes that many of these animals were simply viewed as “black Holsteins,” which cooled enthusiasm among packers.

“If you think back to 2013-14, you were just trying to create a black calf,” he notes. “We weren’t seeing the performance that you would expect from a beef calf. And for a few years, I think that soured the supply chain on the idea of beef-on-dairy.”

As sire selection became more intentional, however, performance improved. By 2017-18, Cleveland says calves coming from dairy cows began to more closely resemble traditional beef calves.

“We had to create animals that were going to perform,” Cleveland says. “And for us, that was really about focusing our genetic improvement to ensure we selected for the right things each segment wanted.”

Some of those genetic improvements included:

Fertility and calving traits for dairies
Feed efficiency and growth traits for feedyards
Carcass merit and consistency traits for the packers

According to Cleveland, these efforts have helped beef-on-dairy calves perform more like native beef cattle. And by focusing on traits that matter for dairies, feedyards and packers, the beef-on-dairy animals that we know today are much more consistent and valuable.

Performance Trends from the Packer’s Rail

With beef-on-dairy calves now performing more like traditional beef cattle, packers see that consistency as essential for maintaining quality and keeping cattle moving through the system.

“Beef-on-dairy is a very important thing for the beef industry right now, especially when we’re talking about capacity,” Hardcastle says. “We have to make sure we have a beef population that can meet our consumers’ demand.”

Importantly, he emphasizes that these animals are not bringing down overall standards in the beef industry.

“They’re good for the consumer,” Hardcastle says. “Tenderness data shows they perform very well, making a positive impact. These aren’t just animals being blended in that lower beef quality; they actually help improve it.”

He references Cleveland’s remarks, highlighting how focused breeding and feeding approaches have contributed to stronger quality grades.

“Over the past five years, we’ve seen quality grade continuously improve,” he says. “Back in 2021, these animals graded 80% Choice or better. Today they’re leveling at about 92% Choice.”

Hardcastle says beef-on-dairy cattle are also making a notable contribution to Prime.

“From a marbling perspective, almost two-thirds of these cattle could qualify for upper two-thirds Choice,” he says. “The ones that don’t usually fall short because of factors like hot carcass weight, ribeye size and fat thickness.”

From a carcass quality perspective, Hardcastle says beef-on-dairy is delivering the kind of results the industry needs. They’re grading well, adding stability to supply and proving they can hold their own in a system that demands both consistency and performance.

Processing Challenges Inside the Plant

Even as grades and marbling improve, processors are still working through carcass traits that affect returns, particularly excess kidney, pelvic and heart (KPH) fat. Hardcastle explains that beef-on-dairy cattle often mirror their Holstein roots, tending to carry more KPH fat than native beef animals.

“From a packing perspective, you pay for a carcass with the kidney, pelvic and heart fat in it, but that fat can’t be sold as beef,” Hardcastle says. “It ends up in the tallow market at 50 to 60 cents a pound, compared with about $3.60 on a beef grid, creating an immediate value loss.”

On today’s heavier carcasses, even modest differences in KPH can add up.

“If I have a 950-lb. carcass, which is pretty common today, that can mean about 12 extra pounds of internal fat instead of saleable meat,” he says. “That difference can cost $30 to $40 per head.”

These carcass differences are also highlighting the limits of traditional yield grade assumptions.

“Yield grade is meant to estimate how much salable red meat a carcass will produce,” Hardcastle explains.

Based on ribeye size, backfat and carcass weight, beef-on-dairy cattle should cut better than native beef, but yield grades often don’t reflect their true performance.

“Yield grade and beef-on-dairy really aren’t closely related,” he says. “Research shows that yield grading doesn’t reliably predict cutability or value for Holsteins or beef-on-dairy cattle.”

This mismatch shows that standard measures like yield grade, internal fat and weight don’t always capture the real value of beef-on-dairy animals, making it challenging for processors to price and sort them at the rail. To address this, Cargill is testing new technology called SizeR to capture 3D carcass measurements at chain speed.

“So, we can evaluate the full composition of these animals, not just traditional ribeye and fat thickness,” Hardcastle says. “This will help feeders and geneticists be able to better target the right traits to improve cutability and consistency.”

Growing and Permanent Force

Each year, millions of beef-on-dairy calves enter the market, providing a reliable source of high-quality cattle that deliver value from the dairy all the way to the packer.

“We have somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 [million] to 3.5 million beef-on-dairy calves in the market today, which obviously represents a significant proportion of that beef supply chain,” Cleveland adds.

That presence is prompting both dairy and beef participants to think differently about their place in the larger system.

“At every stage, from the dairy to the feedyard to the packer, these animals are performing and adding value,” Hardcastle says. “We understand the significance of beef-on-dairy, and we know that beef-on-dairy is not going away.”

As the industry continues to refine how these cattle are evaluated and managed, beef-on-dairy is positioned to remain a dependable contributor to both supply and consumer demand. With ongoing genetic gains and strong beef demand fueling the engine, the sector is gaining momentum and becoming a permanent fixture in the beef supply chain.

Are Below Breed Average Bulls Better?

Tue, 17 Feb 2026 13:20:40 GMT

The use of genetic selection tools by cattle breeders has resulted in significant changes within the majority of major breeds over the last 30 years. With a few exceptions, the overwhelming genetic trend has been for more milk, higher weaning weight, and bigger mature weight.

Without question, the use of expected progeny differences (EPDs) has enabled this change. While we have achieved our goals of more, have we achieved our goals of better?

The late Dr. Bob Taylor from Colorado State University said it well, “Profitable cattle are usually productive, but productive cattle are not always profitable.”

Weaning Weight Questions

Four different benchmark data sets for commercial cow-calf producers from the states of Minnesota, North Dakota, Kansas, as well as Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma have shown little to no change in average weaning weights or calf weaning rates in terms of the percentage of calves weaned per cow exposed over the last 15 years. This has to prompt the question why? How can it be that there has been such significant genetic change in several breeds that should increase weaning weights, but records from several commercial cow-calf data sets would indicate that there has been relatively no change?

In 2014, David Lalman from Oklahoma State University made a presentation at the Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle meeting titled “ Matching Cows to Forage Resources in a World of Mixed Messages .” In that presentation, Lalman made the case that the genetic potential of many cattle today is not supported by the forage resources available, so the animals never fully express their genetic potential. He presented data that shows the cost of maintaining larger cows with higher milk potential exceeds the value produced by small increases in calf weaning weights.

In 1988, Rick Bourdon, wrote a paper titled “ Bovine Nirvana – From the Perspective of a Modeler and Purebred Breeder ” where he presented the case that genetic selection should be toward the optimum for what a set of resources or environment could support.

Bourdon says, “To breed for optimum means to have a target insight beyond which you don’t want to go. If your goal is to maintain an optimum level for any trait, the evidence of your accomplishment is not visible change, but lack of it.”

Replacement Heifer Considerations

Cow-calf producers have EPDs and index tools to make genetic selection decisions related to traits that impact levels of productivity and longevity. Producers selecting sires from which to develop replacement heifers may want to evaluate where their cow herd is compared to what they believe optimum to be.

Producers can work with beef cattle genetic specialists and breed association representatives to help them identify what EPD levels for milk, weaning weight and mature weight best meet their target. What a producer identifies as optimum in terms of milk production, weaning weight and mature size can vary significantly from one operation to another depending upon resources available and management. When optimum is identified, sires can be selected to produce daughters whose maintenance energy, longevity, level of milk production and mature weight will move the cow herd toward identified goals given available resources.

Identifying and selecting optimum genetics for milk production and mature weight is a genetics selection approach that may require a change in focus for many cow-calf producers. It may mean selecting sires at a bull sale that are at or below breed average to move the cow herd genetically toward a desired level for certain traits.

Selecting a bull that is “below breed average” is a paradigm shift for many cow-calf producers. Identifying a window of optimum given a set of resources and then selecting cattle that hit the optimum target is the goal under this method of cattle breeding.

Success in selecting for optimum means that for many producers they will be selecting sires whose EPDs for milk production and mature weight will decrease the average in their herd. Simultaneously, they should be using EPDs to select for traits that will maintain or improve fertility and longevity.

Genetic selection and breeding programs should focus on increased profit, and in many cases this may mean selection for decreased mature weight and milk production to move future replacements for the cow herd towards optimum.

Producer-to-Producer: That’s a Wrap on CattleCon 2026

Fri, 06 Feb 2026 18:57:56 GMT

As beef producers pack up and leave Nashville, Tenn., they are returning home with new strategies, renewed optimism and memories from a memorable CattleCon 2026.

Thank you to the five producers who were our boots on the ground and shared their perspective this week:

Jenna Fitzsimmons, Cunningham, Kan.
Rachel Gray , Blackduck, Minn.
Ken Odde , Pollock, S.D.
Logan Pribbeno , Imperial, Neb.
Kim Rounds, Johnstown, Colo.

Here are their final thoughts about this year’s event:

Fitzsimmons: “My first CattleCon was a great experience! I really enjoyed the overall positive energy at CattleCon that could be felt from meetings, discussions, presentations and interactions I experienced.

“My biggest highlights were the region and policy meetings, Cattlemen’s College sessions and the [National Cattlemen’s Beef Association] State of the Industry Town Hall. These felt the most impactful to me because they allowed producers’ voices to be heard, covered industry issues, expanded my knowledge, inspired me to be a leader and challenged me to improve my operation.

“I love learning and will always be a lifelong learner. CattleCon offered many various learning opportunities for any topic a producer could want. I was able to attend a few sessions I was interested in and even a couple that surprised me by providing knowledge I didn’t realize I needed.

“It is important to go outside of your comfort zone when learning because you never know what you might pick up to improve yourself and your operation. Learning also comes from networking, producer-to-producer.

“I was able to visit with several producers from all across the U.S. and Canada! Everyone was so genuine and kindhearted! Now, you have to take the next step and apply what you have learned, even if it can be daunting. It is pertinent to keep learning and improving as a beef producer for the benefit of the cattle and the consumer. This allows the industry to pave the way and move forward into the future.

“The beef industry is excited, passionate and ready to support the world.”

Gray: “I finished Wednesday attending some Cattleman’s College events. I learned a lot from the ranchers who were part of the legacy panel. Both gentlemen suggested Ranching For Profit and other classes. I am glad to hear the focus on education.

“Thursday, I enjoyed hearing U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speak and getting his thoughts on dietary guidelines . I then headed to the plane to return home for bull sales and calving.”

Odde: The biggest highlight for me was the education and celebration associated with the change in dietary guidelines. I think the change in dietary guidelines has long-term support for demand.

Pribbeno: “The biggest highlight was having [Kennedy] speak at the afternoon general session. He was greeted with a standing ovation. National Cattlemen’s Beef Association President Buck Wehrbein said it was the most packed he has seen a convention setting.

“Kennedy says he eats beef twice a day, and his favorite cut was the strip. He also touched on how and why he and his team rebuilt the food pyramid and the science behind putting proteins at the base.

“The early morning CattleFax session is a perennial favorite. I had an associate tell me that the CattleFax session alone is worth the trip to Nashville. Randy [Blach] and the team presented on a theme that I would call cautious optimism.

“After the CattleFax session, we hit the trade show floor for some networking.”

Rounds: “My biggest takeaway was that I spent the majority of my day with emerging leaders and leadership, and I’m so excited and positive about the future of the beef industry and knowing that our futures are in these kids’ hands.

“They are so hungry, and they want it so bad. Every single conversation that I had yesterday blew me away, and I know that we have a lot of fun and exciting things on the horizon.

“And, of course, the networking. The beef industry is full of the best people, and when we all get together in a room like we did yesterday, you can’t help but have so much fun.”

Why Fiber Quality Matters More for Beef-on-Dairy

Thu, 05 Feb 2026 22:33:20 GMT

On paper, a beef-on-dairy steer may look about the same as conventional beef at finishing. But at the bunk and in the rumen, it’s a very different animal.

While physically these animals are identical, beef-on-dairy cattle are running on a more expensive engine, according to University of Nebraska beef systems Extension educator Alfredo Di Costanzo. During his recent webinar on beef-on-dairy fiber requirements, he used grazing data to highlight the different fiber needs for this terminal cross.

Different Genetics, Different Requirements

During a recent study, when Di Costanzo compared beef breeds to beef-on-dairy animals on pasture, the results were consistent. The traditional beef cattle converted forage to gain more efficiently, while the beef-on-dairy group gained more slowly and finished at lighter weights. To Di Costanzo, it showed the genetic influence of the dairy breed increases the energy required for growth.

“Because I put dairy [genetics] on this beef animal, the maintenance requirements have gone up,” he explains. “If we’re going to increase fiber inclusion, we’re going to have to do it with a better-quality forage.”

Why Low-Quality Fiber Doesn’t Cut It

The challenge is not just that beef-on-dairy cattle use more energy. It is also how quickly feed moves through their systems.

Dairy and dairy-cross animals tend to have a faster rate of passage through the rumen, Di Costanzo notes. That may not sound like a major difference, but it changes what kind of forage they can actually use. A stemmy, lower-quality roughage a beef steer might handle fairly well can end up acting like little more than gut fill in a Holstein-influenced calf.

While this study focused on cattle on pasture, the same idea applies at the feed bunk.

Di Costanzo explains lower-quality fiber does not stay in the rumen long enough to be properly digested for these beef-on-dairy crosses. In nutrition terms, that can create negative effects where poor-quality roughage drags down the performance of the entire ration by taking up space without delivering much energy in return.

“Lower quality forage, for me, means less time for ruminal digestion and more time, too, for negative associative effects,” Di Costanzo warns.

Those negative effects can show up as lower total digestibility, poorer feed efficiency and more variability in intake, especially when cattle are already being pushed on a high‑concentrate program. For beef‑on‑dairy cattle, that means cheap, low‑quality roughage is rarely worth the investment. Di Costanzo notes every pound of dry matter must work harder, making junk roughage a poor economic fit.

Is Cheap Roughage Costing You Gain?

Biologically, cattle can get by on very little fiber if energy and protein are there, Di Costanzo notes.

“At zero or near-zero inclusion of fiber in the diet, cattle are continuing to thrive,” he adds. “There’s really no NDF requirement for maintenance or growth.”

But in a real‑world feeding program, beef‑on‑dairy cattle need rations that turn a profit, not just keep them alive. That’s why Di Costanzo warns against using cheap, low‑quality hay or residues just to say the diet has enough roughage.

Instead, he suggests aiming for about 10% to 15% NDF from good‑quality forage. For many feed yards, that might mean favoring well‑processed silages or higher‑quality forages over the cheapest roughage available. The goal isn’t to stuff the rumen. It’s to support muscle gain without sacrificing efficiency.

Quality Over Quantity

Fiber decisions are not just about keeping the rumen healthy. They also affect how cattle perform on feed and the value you get when it’s time to sell.

Adding more fiber to beef-on-dairy diets can help support greater feed intake, but there’s a limit. Average daily gain starts to drop quickly once physically effective NDF goes above about 15.5%, and feed conversion efficiency also declines. The challenge for producers and nutritionists is finding the sweet spot where cattle eat enough without slowing growth.

Overall, the type of NDF is less important than making sure cattle get the right amount of good-quality fiber. Hitting that balance helps support intake, maintain feed efficiency and keep beef-on-dairy steers performing at their best. For beef on dairy cattle, a well-planned grower ration with the right balance of concentrate and quality fiber can set cattle up for a better finish.

Producer-to-Producer: The Lessons We've Learned During CattleCon

Wed, 04 Feb 2026 21:26:52 GMT

It’s day two of CattleCon 2026. It’s been an exciting day of educational sessions, time on the trade show floor learning about new products, live AgriTalk broadcasts and taping of U.S. Farm Report.

To help us provide a producer’s perspective, we’ve invited five CattleCon attendees to be our boots on the ground and help us capture highlights from their experiences in Nashville, including:

A first-time CattleCon attendee, Jenna Fitzsimmons, from Cunningham, Kan.
Rachel Gray of Little Timber Farms, Blackduck, Minn., who specializes in developing heifers, is attending her fifth convention.
Ken Odde , South Dakota commercial cow-calf producer from Pollock, who has attended more than 30 NCBA Conventions and Trade Shows.
Commercial cow-calf producer Logan Pribbeno of Wine Glass Ranch, Imperial, Neb., will be attending his third CattleCon this year and is bringing his entire family to experience the event.
Kim Rounds, Five Rivers manager of talent acquisition and social media, is looking forward to her seventh CattleCon.

Tuesday morning two of our producers — Pribbeno and Gray — joined Chip Flory on “AgriTalk” for the Farmer Forum.

Congratulations to Pribbeno and his family on being named the 2025 Environmental Stewardship Award Program (ESAP) national winner on Tuesday evening.

Here’s what the producers have to say about their CattleCon experience thus far:

What have you attended since you arrived in Nashville?

Fitzsimmons: I attended the NCBA policy meetings on Monday and Tuesday, specifically “Live Cattle Marketing” and “Cattle Health & Well-Being”. I also attended the opening general session and the trade show. I highly enjoyed being part of the policy discussion. The specialist speakers within the policy meetings offered great insight. The grassroots discussions throughout this week are so important to the future of the industry. The opening general session with Dale Earnhardt Jr. was very inspiring. I appreciated how he advised those who are at a beginning stage to enjoy it, because you won’t have that time again, and it has its own uniqueness. I loved seeing exhibitors in the trade show of businesses of all kinds and sizes. I cannot wait to learn more about what they all have to offer.

Gray: I attended the opening general session featuring Earnhardt. I’ve also been going to some cattle chats and the learning lounge sessions.

Odde: Probably the session I spent the most time at Tuesday was international trade, and it was a very good session. I learned a number of things. I also thought the BQA producer forum was really good. The BQA program has now gotten much stronger legs than what it actually had earlier in my career. I could really see that at the session, especially taking on the transportation issues, you know, taking this issue far beyond how we use animal health products.

Pribbeno: We went to the Dale Earnhardt Jr. session and turnout was great. I’ve been busy with ESAP discussions following last night’s award ceremony. I am speaking on a panel later this afternoon, and I’m going to the AI (artificial intelligence) Cattleman’s College session. I do think it’s going to be kind of a game changer. So, I’m looking forward to going to that and seeing how to more fully use AI.

Rounds: I spent most of the morning today preparing for my Cattlemen’s College presentation “Work that Works,” where I discussed finding jobs and keeping employees. So, I haven’t actually had a chance to attend too many informational meetings. The majority of my time here has been catching up with my connections I only see here and really seeing what the advocacy side of the industry looks like right now.

Big takeaways so far?

Fitzsimmons: The specialist speakers within the policy meetings offered great insight. I was very impressed with how they were beyond excited for producers to be involved with their processes. These specialists want to make sure what they are doing is working correctly for the producers they serve.

Veterinarian Dr. Sierra Guynn, from Clemson University, presented on the Asian Longhorn Tick (ALHT) in the “Cattle Health & Well-Being” policy meeting. Something I found very interesting was that, unlike most all ticks, the AHLT is resilient in the way that they will go back to feed on a host even if they were knocked off already. Guynn offered several ways of practical tick prevention and control that producers should already be doing through cattle and environment. Within our beef operation, we already are completing those steps through the cattle side. After Guynn’s presentation, I am inspired and challenged to add the environmental prevention and control to our operation plan. I am looking forward to attending her Cattlemen’s College session on New World screwworm on Thursday.

Gray: My key takeaway from Earnhardt’s comments was when he was talking about taking risks and using innovation. It’s okay to be a little bit of a risk taker. The educational sessions on trace minerals were good. It makes me wonder if we are paying enough attention to that in our rations. I will go home and check that.

Odde: No. 1 is the situation we’re in with regard to trade, and particularly the loss of the China market. I think we all kind of know that happened but didn’t really maybe understand the magnitude of that effect. That’s really a big deal for our industry. Our industry will be working hard over the next several years to see if we can recapture that China market.

No. 2 is the importance of the change in dietary guidelines . I’m old enough to remember the war on fat in the ‘80s. And what we started learning, especially in the ‘90s, is that it’s really not fat. It’s really sugar. Sugar is the big, bad, evil item associated with diet. I think this change in the pyramid is a really big deal. It’s not just a big deal for Americans — it’s a big deal globally.

Pribbeno: Earnhardt did a really good job talking about his career and when he knew to hang it up and focus on family. I really appreciated that as a high-performing athlete, and he just at a certain age decided to completely shift his focus, and now he’s really into the people development — his team and the cars that he runs. He’s not about getting the victories anymore. He’s about getting people into their prime positions and outside of his company and developing people. He did a really nice job.

Rounds: I’m always curious to see what the messages are being shared by the advocates of our industry, and that’s kind of where I’ve been focused so far today.

Zoetis Launches First Commercial BRD Genetic Predictions to Help Build More Resilient Beef Herds

Wed, 04 Feb 2026 04:22:14 GMT

Zoetis Inc. today announced the launch of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) genetic predictions in INHERIT^® Select for commercial cow-calf operations and as an upgrade to its INHERIT Connect test for seedstock. This marks the first time that cattle producers can select replacement females and evaluate sires based on genetic predictions for BRD health and survival.

BRD costs the beef industry nearly $1 billion each year due to calf and production losses and increased treatment expenses. Until now, producers had no way to evaluate and select for the genetics that influence calf BRD health and survival after weaning.

“This is a breakthrough for the beef industry,” says Brett Bristol, head of Zoetis Precision Animal Health. “For the first time, producers can make selection and breeding decisions based on Genomic Expected Progeny Differences for BRD health and survival, in addition to production traits. Long-term, this innovation is expected to have meaningful economic impacts on commercial cow/calf producers and downstream backgrounders and feeders.”

Genetics That Compound Over Time

As the rebuilding of the U.S. cow herd begins and replacement costs are at historic highs, producers are looking for ways to build cow herds that last longer, raise healthier calves and deliver predictable value. Genetic advancement from testing and selection compounds over time; the breeding decisions made today influence future herd health and productivity.

INHERIT Select and INHERIT Connect with the BRD Upgrade include three BRD genetic predictions in the form of Genomic expected progeny differences (GEPDs):

BRD Health (BRDH) GEPD: Predicts genetic differences in the likelihood that calves (progeny) will stay healthy after weaning without requiring treatment for BRD. Higher BRDH and lower percent rank are better.
BRD Survival (BRDS) GEPD: Predicts genetic differences in the likelihood that calves (progeny) will survive from arrival for backgrounding to harvest without dying from BRD. Higher BRDS and lower percent rank are better.
$BRD Economic Index: Combines BRDH and BRDS into a single dollar value that estimates revenue impact per calf (progeny). Higher $BRD and lower rank are better.

These predictions are based on feedlot health and performance data from a commercially representative population of more than 50,000 head of cattle across North America. These phenotypes, along with continual genetic data additions, are updated weekly and included in the Zoetis Multi-Breed Genetic Evaluation.

Select Replacements That Build Healthier Calf Crops

“GEPDs for BRD and $BRD bridge an economically important gap in current beef genetic evaluations,” says Kent Andersen, Zoetis Precision Animal Health
director of beef technical services. “BRD predictions give us a way to select for post-weaning BRDH and BRDS and related economic impact that we couldn’t before. That matters when used along with predictions for maternal, feedlot, carcass and adaptability traits, and simplified via economic indexes.”

With BRD genetic predictions in INHERIT Select, commercial cow-calf producers can:

Select replacement heifers with stronger genetic potential across all major economically important traits to set the stage for healthier and more productive calf crops.
Identify and invest in genetics for greater profit potential and less health risk that compounds over time.

Using the population of more than 440,000 commercial animals tested using INHERIT^®, researchers compared the top versus bottom 25th percentile rank based on GEPDs for BRDH, BRDS and $BRD. The comparison shows progeny of the top 25th percentile that are genetically:

25% more likely to stay healthy and not require treatment for BRD from feedlot arrival to harvest
14% more likely to survive and not die from BRD from feedlot arrival to harvest
$12 per calf advantage in net return from combined genetics for BRDH and BRDS

Evaluate Bulls for BRD Health Genetics

For seedstock, the INHERIT Connect + BRD Upgrade provides a powerful way to evaluate bull batteries and potentially differentiate sale bulls based on BRD GEPDs and $BRD.

With the INHERIT Connect + BRD Upgrade, producers can:

Potentially differentiate sale bulls with BRD predictions that benefit commercial buyers and downstream backgrounders and feeders
Evaluate A.I. sires and bull batteries to benchmark genetic merit for BRD and identify favorable and unfavorable outliers
Document genetic merit for BRDH and BRDS and position future calf crops for premium prices

When comparing bulls tested using INHERIT Connect + BRD Upgrade, bulls in the top 25th percentile rank for $BRD have a $1200 predicted advantage over bulls in the bottom 25th percentile rank, assuming they sire 100 calves during their lifetime.

Producers can contact their Zoetis Genetics representative or visit beefgenetics.com to learn more and get started with testing.

Will Beef-on-Dairy Help Rebuild America’s Record-Low Cattle Numbers?

Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:10:38 GMT

America’s cow herd has shrunk to levels not seen in 75 years, falling to 86.2 million head. Weather challenges, high input costs and record cattle prices have made heifer retention a difficult decision for many beef producers, keeping numbers tight. In response, more feedlots have turned their attention toward the dairy sector, where beef-on-dairy calves are helping to fill the gap.

Can Beef-on-Dairy Help Fill Feedlot Pens?

As beef cow numbers continue to slide, beef‑on‑dairy calves have stepped up, offering feedlots a steady source of quality cattle. That growing demand is giving dairy farmers a chance to cash in on a market with lucrative returns.

A 2024 industry survey found about 72% of dairy producers are actively using beef-on-dairy breeding programs, and production numbers mirror this trend. CattleFax estimates beef-on-dairy calf production jumped from just 50,000 head in 2014 to 3.22 million in 2024, with projections likely to reach 5 to 6 million head by 2026.

These trends are reflected in the latest USDA numbers, which show just how tight beef supplies are and how the dairy herd is playing a growing role in meeting demand:

The number of milk cows in the U.S. increased 2% to 9.57 million.

Total Cattle and Calves Inventory: 86.2 million head (down 0.35%)
Beef Cow Herd: 27.6 million head (down 1%)
2025 Calf Crop: 32.9 million head (smallest since 1941)
Beef Replacement Heifers: 4.71 million head (up 1%)

(USDA Data)

Brad Kooima of Kooima Kooima Varilek believes the tightest supply of this entire cattle cycle could occur in the next 60 to 90 days. During a recent episode of “AgriTalk”, Kooima highlighted how beef-on-dairy has become a major component helping to keep the beef supply chain strong.

“The gorilla in the room, to me, is beef-on-dairy,” he says. “From a couple of standpoints, the dairy cow herd’s the biggest since 1993. It’s grown and grown, and why wouldn’t you if you can get $1,200 to $1,500 for a day-old calf?”

What used to be a steady stream of native beef calves is now increasingly made up of dairy-beef crosses. Feedlot managers say these cattle have helped provide something the beef industry has long struggled with — a reliable, steady supply.

Dr. Eric Belke, veterinarian and feedlot partner at Blackshirt Feeders in Nebraska, says that need for consistency is exactly why Blackshirt Feeders was designed around beef-on-dairy cattle.

“Historically, in the feedlot world, there has been a lot of seasonality. With the beef-on-dairy population, we have a very consistent flow of cattle throughout the year,” he explained during the 2025 MILK Business Conference. “We needed a very large and consistent supply chain.”

Belke’s experience highlights how some feedlots are restructuring their operations to lean heavily on beef-on-dairy cattle, designing facilities and supply chains around the predictability these animals provide.

“Our feedlot was really built for feeding beef-on-dairy animals,” Belke says. “Right now, we’re at a capacity of 100,000 head, and we’re under construction. Next year, we’ll be at 150,000 head. By the end of 2027, we’ll be at 200,000 head. Currently, we have about 87,000 head on feed, and over 90% of those are beef-on-dairy animals.”

What Impact is it Having on Packers?

That predictable pipeline isn’t just benefiting feedlots. Packers are seeing the results, too.

Each year, several hundred thousand beef-on-dairy animals are processed alongside native beef cattle. And the quality within these animals is strong, with many grading very high Choice and even Prime. That quality has helped secure their place in the market.

Nick Hardcastle, Cargill senior director of meat grading and technical specialist, explains beef-on-dairy calves are an upgrade to the traditional Holstein steer.

“Beef-on-dairy is more desirable because it helped overcome several Holstein difficulties,” he says. “Improvements include red meat yield — more meat to a consumer — as well as improved acceptance in branded programs.”

That progress comes from being more intentional with breeding and management. Since replacement females aren’t the goal for the dairy farmers producing these calves, they and their genetic partners can focus on the traits that matter most to the beef supply chain, like calving ease, feed efficiency, days to finish, carcass weight, marbling and overall yield.

Data is what makes that possible. By linking individual AI sires to feedyard performance and carcass outcomes through electronic identification and data sharing, some supply chains are reviewing sire performance every six months and making rapid adjustments. The result has been a measurable improvement in grade, efficiency and days to finish — driven by genetics and management working together.

The Other Side of a Hot Market

While the beef-on-dairy boom has been a big win for dairy farmers, not everyone is celebrating its rise in popularity. Kooima worries about the long-term effects of vertical integration and the growing control some companies now have over the supply chain.

“For the first time, you’ve got an integrator that can control an animal from its birthday and schedule it out 341 days later to slaughter,” he explains. “It’s a dream the packers chase. I watched what happened in hogs and poultry. This scares me to death. The combination of all of that is we’re losing price discovery. They’re going to try to slow it down as much as they can until they control the supply.”

That tension, between a system solving today’s supply problem and one that could reshape how cattle are marketed, is shaping much of the beef‑on‑dairy conversation.

With the U.S. native beef herd unlikely to rebound soon, beef-on-dairy is becoming an important part of keeping the supply chain steady. While the long-term market effects are still unfolding, the trend highlights how the dairy sector is helping meet the country’s ongoing demand for beef.

Can Beef Producers Balance Carcass and Maternal Traits?

Tue, 03 Feb 2026 10:46:46 GMT

When you look at quality grid premiums, Angus cattle continue to defy the fundamentals of supply and demand. As Angus cattle continue to improve, today there is a higher percentage of high-quality carcasses hanging on the rail, yet producers continue to get paid for it. That’s strong demand — and a clear signal back to ranchers.

These gains are driven by consumers who continue to purchase beef for its superior taste and tenderness. As this pull-through demand signal from the consumer has become evident, Angus breeders have met end-users’ increased appetite for quality beef. At the same time, Angus cows continue to offer strong maternal traits while raising calves that may later enter the supply chain.

As carcass quality improves and the average marbling (Marb) expected progeny difference (EPD) for the Angus breed increases, many Angus breeders ask the supply development team at Certified Angus Beef (CAB), “Do we still need to focus on marbling?”

Data says yes.

Money On The Table

The Angus breed has a strong market share, with 72% of fed cattle being Angus-influenced. Still, only four in 10 head that meet the live animal specifications go on to meet all 10 CAB carcass specifications. In 2024, 82% of Angus-influenced cattle didn’t have enough marbling (CAB Consist Study).

(Certified Angus Beef)

While cattle may not qualify for CAB for missing multiple carcass specifications, the greatest opportunity to increase the amount of Angus-influenced cattle that qualify for CAB are those that barely miss the marbling requirement.

Evaluating the marbling distribution of Angus-influenced cattle provides a clearer picture of the portion of the population that falls short of CAB’s marbling threshold. Just over 10% of our missed supply is within only 30 points of marbling. Moderate improvements in marbling can still leave room for improved selection across multiple traits while making meaningful strides in product quality.

(Certified Angus Beef)

The data proves that marbling should still be a priority. But additional data shows that it doesn’t have to be your only priority.

Are Marbling, Feet and Fertility Related?

Another common question from cattle country: Has the Angus breed been so focused on marbling that it’s lost sight of other valuable traits? Specifically, feet and fertility are recent areas of concern.

In search of answers, CAB worked alongside the American Angus Association (Association) team to identify genetic trends between fertility and feet issues and the culled animals’ Marb EPDs. The Association provided all disposal code records from the Angus Herd Improvement Records (AHIR) database for both fertility and feet from 2010 through 2023. AHIR offers valuable insights into the primary reasons cattle were removed from a herd.

In both cases, there was a normal distribution of animals culled—indicated by the bell-shaped curve. The real lessons become visible when we draw lines at the marbling threshold for Targeting the Brand.

From 2010 to 2023, more than 7,600 cows, bull, and calves were culled for foot issues. Many culls fall below the black line representing the Targeting the Brand minimum requirement for Marb EPD (+0.65.)

(Certified Angus Beef)

From 2010 to 2023, more than 72,000 females were culled from the herd due to being open or having other fertility issues. Many culls fall below the black line representing the Targeting the Brand minimum requirement for Marb EPD (+0.65.)

(Certified Angus Beef)

For several years, CAB has published Targeting the Brand requirements for Marb EPD and Grid Value ($G) Index to help commercial customers easily identify registered Angus animals with added genetic carcass value. The minimum genetic requirement thresholds are +0.65 Marb EPD and +55 $G.

The most cattle culled for feet and fertility fall below +0.65 for marbling. Incidentally, the 2025 breed average for current sires was +0.64. While there are cattle with very high marbling values culled from herds due to feet or fertility problems, the whole picture shows that many of those culled cattle are not considered elite for carcass quality. Moreover, this data shows that recent improvements in Marb EPDs aren’t to blame. In both disposal codes, the bulk of the curve peaks at around a +0.40 Marb EPD, which was the average for Angus cattle born in 2005.

Perhaps improvement in quality doesn’t rely on extremes.

Simultaneous Improvement

Cattlemen and women have a responsibility to look critically at their own herd, determine the areas that warrant improvement, and cull animals accordingly. Stockmen bring immense value by objectively evaluating phenotypes, regardless of what the numbers say, and setting individual breeding objectives.

When evaluating EPDs and considering what you’re breeding for, you must first recognize your environmental needs. Second would consider resources (labor, land availability, etc.) at your disposal. Third are your marketing goals and, just as important, your customers’ marketing goals.

For cattle producers who have goals of increasing their CAB acceptance rates, Targeting the Brand is a data-driven selection tool that helps bull and female customers more easily identify registered Angus animals that will help them achieve a 60% CAB acceptance rate, whereas the 2025 CAB acceptance rate (not exclusive to those utilizing Targeting the Brand) averages 37%.

Some Angus breeders or their customers’ breeding objectives are higher than CAB acceptance and focus on increasing the number of cattle that grade USDA Prime. In 2025, the industry average Prime acceptance rate was around 11%. If you manage an average commercial cow herd under average management and environmental conditions, then data suggests registered Angus bulls with a +1.10 Marb EPD and +72 $G have more potential to achieve a 20% Prime acceptance rate.

As you’re making mating decisions for your next breeding season or headed to purchase new herd bulls, there’s space to put emphasis on marbling without excluding other valuable traits for your operation.

Sale Day Tip

The Angus Sire Evaluation Report and Angus Media’s Pasture to Publish sale catalogs both offer an EPD Search tool, allowing you to set your EPD parameters and search for animals in a sale book that meet your criteria. When sale day arrives, you already know which bulls carry the genetics that will help meet your breeding objectives.

AngusLink Offers GeneMax Enhancement for Genetic Merit Scorecard

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 11:53:59 GMT

Commercial producers with Angus-based cow herds can access a new value-added marketing option with the GeneMax®-enhanced Genetic Merit Scorecard ^® (GMS) from AngusLink ^®.

This connection serves as another way for producers to set themselves apart in the marketplace, says Troy Marshall, director of commercial industry relations for the American Angus Association ^®.

GeneMax Advantage is a genetic test for high-percentage commercial Angus females, and the GMS is a valued-added marketing tool that objectively describes the performance potential of a group of feeder calves. Each is powered by the Association’s database, the industry’s largest genetic database, with product research and intelligence managed by Angus Genetics, Inc. (AGI^®).

“The GMS has already proven to be exceptionally accurate, but building values to represent the cow herd side [of the scorecard’s calculations] naturally took time,” Marshall says. “GeneMax speeds up the process, so the latest update to the GMS is about improving it further. The more precise the GMS becomes, the more value it creates for the entire industry.”

He says GeneMax Advantage has also built itself a reputation as a reliable tool. Recent improvements have included adding five dollar value indexes ($Values) to test results on individuals as well as scores for five additional traits: Functional Longevity (FL), Teat Size (Teat), Udder Suspension (UDDR), Hair Shed (HS), and Pulmonary Arterial Pressure (PAP). The $Values on the test are directly comparable to the $Values of registered Angus bulls, making it the practical choice to test commercial heifers out of registered Angus bulls. It also includes Sire Match™ services, which provides sire parentage for tested daughters of registered and HD 50K or Angus GS-tested bulls.

(American Angus Association)

What’s Required

To qualify for the GeneMax-enhanced scorecard, 10% or more of a producer’s cow herd must be tested. The standard requirements for enrolling a calf crop in the GMS program also still apply. Those include Age and Source verification through IMI Global, a division of Where Food Comes From; the cow herd breed composition for the calves being enrolled; and a list of sire registration numbers. Sires must be predominantly (50% or more) registered Angus.

“Having an additional source of information brings more precision to the calculation, but the logic behind the scorecard is still the same,” says Rafael Medeiros, geneticist with AGI. “The scores of GeneMax-tested cows will be considered in the cow side of the equation — on a scale that matches the percentage of your cow herd that’s been tested — to calculate that calf crop’s GMS. This added transparency and credibility makes your marketing even stronger, helping buyers recognize the depth of your genetic investment.”

During the American Angus Association’s fiscal year 2025, AngusLink premiums averaged $20.92 per hundredweight (cwt.). Medeiros and Marshall agree this new scorecard option is an extension of efforts by the Association and AGI to help commercial producers both make genetic progress in their herds and help them get paid for it on sale day.

There is no additional cost for the connection. The only cost for receiving a GeneMax-enhanced GMS is the regular cost of GeneMax testing at $28 per female and typical AngusLink enrollment costs, which include the expense of Age and Source verification.

To signal interest in the enhanced scorecard, producers check a box indicating they have tested with GeneMax Advantage when completing the AngusLink enrollment form. To begin an enrollment, producers can contact the AngusLink team at anguslink.com or 816-383-5100. To begin GeneMax testing, visit www.GeneMaxAngus.com and place an order, or complete the “Talk to a Rep about GeneMax” form on the webpage.

Improving GMS scores

A frequently asked question about the GMS from users is, “How can I improve my scores?” Medeiros says this connection provides an efficient path for doing that.

“Producers of all sizes have found success with GeneMax Advantage,” he says. “Because GeneMax delivers results on individual animals, you can make selection and breeding decisions with greater precision and have a greater effect on genetic merit within a shorter period. The sooner you begin, the sooner you’ll see the advantages of integrating GeneMax data into your marketing strategy.”

The scorecard values range from 0 to 200, with the industry average being 100. The higher the score, the greater the genetic merit of the calves. Medeiros says the effect of adding GeneMax scores depends on the genetic quality of a herd.

The more cows you test, the greater the impact GeneMax data will have on your Genetic Merit Scorecard scores, Marshall adds.

“Testing a higher percentage of females adds more detail and insight, giving buyers a clearer view of your herd’s genetic potential,” he says. “By incorporating GeneMax Advantage insights into selection and mating decisions, you can really accelerate the rate of genetic improvement within your herd.”

Marshall says this enhancement brings full circle the suite of tools designed in partnership with AGI for the the American Angus Association to benefit commercial cattlemen.

“We can always get better,” he says. “Once you’ve selected the right bulls, GeneMax Advantage offers the most accurate heifer selection tool available, allowing you to build and describe a cow herd that aligns with your goals. After establishing the right genetics, the focus shifts to capturing their value — marketing your feeder cattle in a way that reflects their true worth. AngusLink has transformed that process. It is the most recognized and trusted method for conveying the genetic merit of commercial feeder cattle.”

How Clear Objectives Lead to Smarter Bull Selection

Fri, 16 Jan 2026 14:47:29 GMT

Various factors play a role in decision-making as producers flip through a sale catalog looking for a new bull. It is important to find a strategy that works for your program and create selection criteria that will help you find a bull to progress your operation toward your goals.

Each producer has their own set of priorities in which they rank their options, various budgets for buying bulls, and different genetic preferences.

“Define your objective of what you’re trying to accomplish,” says Jeff Mafi, American Angus Association regional manager. “How are you going to use the bulls? Are they going on heifers or cows? How are you going to sell those calves by those bulls? Are you retaining ownership or keeping replacement females? What selection tools do you need to use to help accomplish what you are trying to do?”

Mafi says defining these things will make it a lot easier to go through a sale book and find the individuals that will help move you forward. For a first-time buyer, he recommends having a good understanding of that breed’s expected progeny differences (EPDs) and indexes and how to use them.

“Don’t hesitate to reach out to a breeder and ask questions,” he adds. “They know their cattle and their genetics the best.”

With plenty of information available from data and genomics to photos and videos, Mafi says many producers still walk through the cattle in person to get a feel for the disposition even if they may bid online later. While crowds at live sales have not diminished, online bidding presence has increased, allowing customers to buy bulls from all over the country.

Travis Meteer, beef Extension specialist at the University of Illinois, says bull selection should start with the bull’s functional ability to breed cows.

“This includes feet, legs, structural soundness, a good libido, a passed breeding soundness exam and body condition appropriate for a breeding bull. Not too fat and not too thin. I would also include a good disposition in this,” Meteer says.

From there, Meteer agrees that selection criteria need to be catered to the herd goals and emphasizes the use of data and multi-trait selection.

“A bull needs to inject genetics that fit the goals of the herd from a management and marketing perspective,” Meteer explains. “DNA-enhanced EPDs and multi-trait selection indexes can aid in helping make decisions that are based on reliable data and not one single trait. While past criteria were heavily weighted on output traits, inputs and cost of production are being better weighted today than in the past.”

When buying bulls for a commercial operation, Meteer says leaving hybrid vigor on the table is a big loss.

“Lowly heritable traits like reproduction, health and cow longevity are best improved by crossbreeding,” he adds. “Crossbred cows and maternal heterosis are a key to profitability on commercial cow-calf operations. Studies have shown that net profit per cow is increased by $75/cow per year as a result of maternal heterosis.”

Producer Perspective

Will Andras of Andras Stock Farm, a Red Angus seedstock operation in west-central Illinois, says he looks at three main things when selecting a bull: soundness, phenotype and genetic potency. When flipping through a sale catalog, Andras says photos are important. Overly photoshopped pictures with clear structural alterations are a deal-breaker.

Beyond photos, Andras combs through EPDs, ratios within a contemporary group and pedigrees.

“We aspire to produce superior, outcross seedstock on the bleeding edge of the Red Angus breed,” he adds. “We focus on the necessary and practical convenience traits while also attempting to stack those premium pieces that fit tomorrow’s demand. Genetics are paramount, and outcross genetics are a plus. Genomically-enhanced EPDs are a must. Soundness, phenotype and disposition have never gone out of style and never will.”

Andras Stock Farm has its own registered Red Angus bull sale in the spring, and while it depends on weather, most customers walk through the cattle on sale day and bid in person. However, Andras says they also see a large presence in online bidding.

Haddie Simmentals of Walkerton, Ontario, raises full-blood and purebred Simmentals and was recently honored as the Ontario Simmental Commercial Producer of the Year. They start their herd bull search with structural soundness because of their location and terrain.

“Having good feet and overall correct structure is crucial for performance and walking our pastures,” says Ashley Fairminer of Haddie Simmentals. “Easy calving, too. While birth weight doesn’t play a huge roll in our selection, we look for a bull with lots of length to him for easier births on our cows and reducing loss of calves.”

When evaluating genetics, Fairminer says they look for data to prove they produce good maternal cows with good milk and consistent fertility. Whether they have a bull or heifer, both could stay in the herd for a long time, so consistent quality in genetics is important to their operation. When they receive a sale catalog, they look for those traits as they flip through the lots.

“We always pick a handful and call the farmer and ask about the bull, temperament, feet, dam, etc.,” Fairminer says. “We find a conversation with the farmer is the best way we can learn if a bull would be a good fit for our family and program.”

With a primary focus on replacement heifers, Haddie Simmentals focuses on selecting a bull with good maternal traits and dispositions.

“We strive to raise heifers our customers can be proud to have in their fields and ones their families can work without hesitation, and we know quality bulls play a crucial role in achieving that goal,” Fairminer adds.

Ultimately, starting the search for a new bull begins with defining program objectives and selection criteria that are important to your programs success. Many cattlemen start with the end product in mind, using a plethora of tools to find their next bull.

Your Next Read:

How Do You Score an Udder?

Tue, 13 Jan 2026 17:04:11 GMT

Anyone who has ever attempted to milk out a sore balloon-teated cow can certainly relate to the need for quality udders. A key to good udders is documenting udder quality at calving and using that data in culling, selection and mating decisions.

While collecting and reporting udder scores to breed associations is important for the calculation of expected progeny differences (EPDs), the practice and analysis of data also benefits herd improvement and profitability.

For seedstock producers, collecting teat size and udder suspension scores can improve the accuracy of the EPDs in their herd. Likewise, commercial producers can see herd improvement with decreased labor, increased cow longevity as well as improved calf health and performance.

Commercial cattleman Rick Busch, Busch Brothers Farms, Washington, Mo., records individual udder scores at calving. When tagging a calf, he also scores the cow’s udder using the universal BIF (Beef Improvement Federation) scoring system , which scores both udder suspension and teat size.

BIF recommends scoring udder suspension and teat size annually within 24 hours of calving. These numerical scores can easily be assigned in the pasture.

“A two-score system allows independent evaluation of teat size and suspension characteristics,” explains Bob Weaber, Kansas State University professor and head of the Eastern Kansas Research and Extension Centers. “While there is a general trend for cows with large teat size to also have poorer suspension, this is not always the case. The independent scoring of the two important udder quality traits allows more precise measurement of each trait. Even though these scores are subjective, they’ll do a better job documenting variation in udder quality than a single-score system. When the two scores are used, the heritability estimates for each trait should be higher due to increased precision of measurement.”

Weaber suggests producers make udder score collection a routine part of performance data collection at calving.

“Until you get comfortable with the scoring system, tape a scoring guide to your clipboard or reduce on a copy machine and tape in your ‘red book’ for use in the field; try to get as close as you can to the guide and be as consistent as possible,” he suggests. “Once you do it for a while, you’ll start picking out the really good ones and really bad ones easily. Be honest with yourself and use as much of the scale as needed. If she’s a 1 on suspension and 1 on teat size, give the scores.”

Weber explains there is no perfect score, but it is the ranking and the differences within the herd that are important.

Scores should be assigned according to the worst quarter of the cow’s udder. To ensure consistency and facilitate comparison of records, preferably one person should evaluate all cows each year and across years. Written notes about abnormal shapes or characteristics other than udder suspension and teat size can be useful.

Rick Rasby, University of Nebraska-Lincoln professor and cow-calf Extension specialist, says udder conformation will decline as the female ages, but do not take age into account when assigning an udder score.

The BIF scoring system doesn’t account for teat and udder pigmentation.

“Pigmentation is desirable as it is a guard against sunburn of the teat and udder that can be caused by direct sunshine or reflection of the sun off snow,” Rasby adds.

BIF and multiple breed associations have tools available to help with the scoring process. Here are a few resources:
BIF Guidelines
Angus Udder Scoring
Hereford Udder Scoring
Red Angus Udder Scoring

How Do You Score Udder Suspension?

Udder suspension cores range from 9 (very tight) to 1 (very pendulous) and represent assessments of udder support. Weak udder suspension results in pendulous udders that make it difficult for a calf to nurse.

Weak suspension in the udder indicates a lack of support in the ligament that ties the udder to the cow’s body wall. Over time, weakness in this ligament will allow the udder to hang down too far from the body and could subject the udder to serious problems and increased potential for injury

“The tighter to the body cavity that the udder is placed, the more desirable,” Rasby summarizes. “This allows for the calf to more easily to locate the teats, and it is less likely for the teats to drag in the mud.”

How Do You Score Teat Size?

Teat scores range from 9 (very small) to 1 (very large, balloon shaped) and are subjective assessments of teat length and circumference.

Oversized teats are difficult for newborn calves to nurse and the calf might not receive adequate colostrum, which could lead to a higher incidence of scours or decreased immunity levels in the newborn calf. In Canadian studies, cows with more desirable teat scores had calves that nursed sooner after birth.

4 Tips for Effective Udder Scoring

Collect within 24 hours of calving
Use weakest quarter to score both teat size and udder suspension
Score both teat size and udder suspension on 1–9 scale, independently
Best if one person scores all females in each management group

Examples of Udder Suspension and Teat Scores

Udder suspension score 9, teat score 9

(American Hereford Assn./Hereford World)

Udder suspension score 8, teat score 7

(UNL Beef Watch)

Udder suspension score 7, teat score 7

(UNL Beef Watch)

Udder suspension score 5, teat score 5

(UNL Beef Watch)

Udder suspension score 3, teat score 3

(UNL Beef Watch)

Udder suspension score 1, teat score 1

(American Hereford Assn./Hereford World)

What's The Cost to Lease a Bull in 2026?

Tue, 13 Jan 2026 14:16:40 GMT

According to Oklahoma State University’s Mark Johnson, in the current market, a good bull is worth somewhere between $12,000 to $17,175 to a commercial cow-calf operation in 2026.

In a recent article , Johnson, OSU extension beef cattle breeding specialist, explains where exactly in that range depends on a producer’s marketing plan and the market conditions at that time.

“There’s not an exact number because there are many variables in play,” he says.

He explains one potential way for a commercial cow-calf operation to reduce expenses is to lease, rather than own, a bull.

“Producers should compare the costs and benefits of leasing versus owning,” Johnson says in his recent Cow-Calf Corner article.

Leasing eliminates the capital expenditure of purchasing a bull.

Johnson explains, given the current circumstances, the realistic cost of leasing a 15-month-old bull that is valued at $10,000 and assumed to lose 100 lb. during the lease at $25/day for a 60-day breeding season:

Breeding Fee: $25 x 60 days = $1,500
Weight Loss: 100 lb. x $1 per lb. cost of gain = $100
Insurance: $10,000 x 3.5% = $350
Trichomoniasis Test = $75
Total = $2,025*
*In the current market, based on the quality and genetic value of the bull, prices will vary.

So, assuming the 15-month-old bull will cover 15 cows/heifers during the breeding season, the cost per female bred is $135.

How does this compare to owning bulls?

The following chart assumes a bull provides service until the age of 6. It serves as another way to evaluate the cost per female bred, based on various purchase prices of ownership.

Bull Purchase Price:

$5,600	$8,400	$11,200	$14,000
$40	$60	$80	$100

Cost per female bred - assuming 140 calves sired over duration of time as a herd bull.

For more information on bull value, see Johnson’s recent article:

What is a Good Bull Worth in 2026?

“Whether leasing or purchasing bulls, the expense will be highly dependent on the cattle market and quality of the bull,” Johnson says. “A leased bull is usually kept only during the breeding season so maintenance costs associated with bull ownership are reduced.”

For example, the cost of feeding a bull is realistically at least $1 per day. Additional costs are associated with veterinary care and medicine, labor, potential death loss and the facilities needed to keep bulls safe and secure during the off-season, as well as depreciation and interest.

“All these things considered, bull ownership has a price tag of several hundred dollars annually when bulls aren’t breeding cows,” Johnson summarizes.

Is Leasing an Option For You?

Johnson says leasing bulls may not be an option for all producers.

He encourages commercial cow-calf producer to make a plan in advance of breeding season by checking with seedstock vendors to see if they offer bull leasing options and confirm they will have bulls available for lease when needed. If seedstock producers are receptive to bull leasing, both the lessor and lessee need to consider how leasing a bull could affect the health of the herd.

“Leasing virgin bulls is ideal to ensure that a venereal disease such as vibriosis or trichomoniasis is not introduced into the lessee’s herd,” Johnson says. “A negative test for trichomoniasis (at very least) is a standard part of the lease agreement before the leased bull can be returned to the lessor’s herd. In addition, leasing bulls does not come with the benefit of the salvage value when older bulls are sold.”

Johnson explains four considerations of a typical bull lease agreement for the benefit of both parties:

A daily, monthly or breeding season fee. These fees typically start at $25/day depending on the quality and genetic value of the bull(s). The lessor would guarantee a bull has passed a breeding soundness exam.
A value per pound of bull weight loss during the lease. This typically is based on the cost of regaining the weight after bull is returned. In the current market, $1/pound is reasonable. Both parties should agree on a reasonable weight loss and cost of regaining the weight and include this in the lease agreement.
Cattle mortality insurance to protect the lessor from death loss. Both parties should agree on the value of the bull. Typically the lessee would purchase a policy covering the value of the bull, pay the premium and the policy would be paid to the lessor in the event of the bull’s death. Currently, a 60-day policy could be purchased for 3.5%, and a 90-day policy could be purchased for 4% of the established value of the bull.
Health. Typically, a negative test for trichomoniasis at completion of the lease and prior to the bull’s return, is a standard part of the lease agreement. This cost (usually $50 to $100), is covered by the lessor.