Zoetis

Three Keys to Implant Selection During Drought Conditions

Mon, 27 Sep 2021 15:29:11 GMT

All implants aren’t created equal. That’s why a cookie-cutter-approach selection won’t deliver the best results in your stocker cattle.

Three key factors should be considered when choosing an implant—and that is especially true during drought conditions, according to Dr. Gary Sides, a beef cattle nutritionist with Zoetis strategic technical services.

Sides lists the key factors in determining which implant to use:

The estimated number of days that animal will be on pasture
The pasture’s forage quality and availability
Total days of ownership

According to Sides, under normal pasture conditions, the improvement in average daily gain due to implanting ranges from 0.15 to 0.33 pounds per day.

“In a drought situation, if you have old standing forage, you need to supplement protein to improve both digestibility and feed intake,” he explained. “If you have no grass, you have to provide everything for them on pasture, or you put them in a feedlot. If the cattle are in a feedlot, then you have a whole different implant strategy.”

Sides added that if a drought occurs in the middle of the grazing season and you run short on both forage quantity and quality, you must decide whether to supplement them on pasture, or pull them from pasture and put them in a feedlot.

“Once forage quantity and quality deteriorate, cattle can actually go backwards and lose weight without supplementation,” he said.

The potency of the implant you select is dependent on both forage quantity and quality. Better pasture conditions allow for better daily gains and the opportunity to choose a more potent implant, Sides explained. Synovex^® S and H (under 140 days grazing) and Synovex One Grass (SOG; up to 200-day effective payout) are excellent choices for use in normal pasture conditions.

In a drought where cattle might be gaining less than two pounds a day, Sides recommends using Synovex C, which matches the potency of the implant with the pasture conditions. He added that Synovex C is the lowest dose implant on the market approved for both steers and heifers and matches the potency of the implant with less than optimum forage conditions.

Additionally, Sides recommends not implanting cattle that are gaining less than 1.0 pounds per day because enough protein and energy are not being provided in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements of the implant. You can include a supplement with an ionophore like Bovatec^® to elevate this plane of nutrition, so an implant can deliver you a return on investment.

Early Weaning Considerations
Often in drought situations, calves are weaned early—weighing as little as 200 to 400 pounds. In those instances, Sides said matching the potency of the implant with the level of nutrition of the cattle delivers the best results from the implant. Synovex C would be the best implant choice in this situation as well.

“For cattle gaining less than 1.5 pounds/day, it’s best not to use a high potency implant, since they cannot consume enough nutrients to meet the increased energy and protein requirements stimulated by the implants,” Sides said. “That’s why I like Synovex C in low forage quality conditions. For steers and heifers, it gives you great response and meets animal energy levels and growth potentials.”

Consider Days of Ownership
Sides says sometimes the best-laid plans don’t always work out. That holds true when it comes to implanting cattle during droughts.

When using Synovex One Grass (SOG) in a 200-day grazing program where marketing opportunities change or forage quality deteriorates, and cattle must be removed from pastures because of drought, then Sides said to remember the flexibility this product offers in a feedlot setting. Cattle can still benefit from the number of days left in that implant as they arrive at the feedlot.

Remember Parasite Control
In a drought, cattle tend to graze in areas containing the best forage availability. When that occurs, internal parasite infections can increase and depress forage intake and digestibility and suppress the animal’s immune system. The most effective implant strategy includes controlling internal parasites. The best treatments for parasite control include injectable products like Dectomax^® or oral drenches like Valbazen^®. Implanted cattle will respond more efficiently when the negative effects of parasites are eliminated.

Choose the Right Implant
Sides said an implant like SOG delivers a continuous payout throughout its 200-day label. Therefore, ensuring the nutrient needs of the cattle will be met for the entire 200-day grazing period is essential. Traditional implants such as Synovex C, S and H would be more appropriate for pastures and/or ownership of cattle for less than 120 days.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Be Flexible for Better Parasite Control

Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:36:18 GMT

While parasite control might seem as simple as choosing a product and application method, the task these days is no easy venture. Giving consideration to timing while also selecting the chemical best suited for the parasite to be controlled can help producers avoid potential resistance issues.

According to Dr. Mark Alley, managing technical services veterinarian with Zoetis, parasite control becomes complicated when treatment methods include the same products or chemicals used repeatedly.

Because parasite load varies by time of year and region of the country, Alley says those factors must be considered when developing a parasite control regimen. “The main thing is to think about which animals are going to be most impacted by parasites,” Alley explains.

He says it’s also important to consider when animals are going to be processed and whether or not that corresponds with the best time for parasite control. Flexibility can create an opportunity to do a better job with parasite control while also not fostering resistance issues with a particular product or chemical

The cattle business is rooted in tradition. Because the industry hasn’t seen a lot of new parasite control products hit the market, Alley says it’s important for producers to consider changing the way parasiticides are used. Timing is key in that.

“Probably the best time to deworm adult cows is within a few weeks prior to calving,” Alley says. However, he encourages producers to work with their veterinarian to consider an alternate schedule if that timing doesn’t work.

Alley says another consideration should be the cow’s nutrition and how available forage might be impacted by weather.

“We might need to do some deworming, especially in younger animals, at a time that we normally would not, if those animals are nutritionally compromised. That’s when our parasites will probably have more of an impact than they would if there’s plenty of nutrition available,” he explains.

According to Alley, younger animals are most susceptible to parasites, as they enter their first grazing season, regardless of the time of year. He says those animals can be impacted by a lot of different parasites, especially Cooperia, Haemonchus and Nematodirus.

“Unfortunately, the dewormers that we typically reach for to control those are macrocyclic lactones,” he explains. “And with those parasites, efficacy may not be as good as it once was.”

Based on research, benzimidazole dewormers, like Valbazen^®, might be better suited to control Cooperia, Haemonchus and Nematodirus, he adds.¹

While internal parasite control is important, it’s also vital to develop a plan for keeping external parasites at bay. Alley says insect growth regulators that can be added to feed as well as fly tags, back rubs and other topicals are good options for controlling flies and lice.

Alley says a veterinarian can assist producers with identifying parasite issues and help them establish a plan of action to address the challenges they are facing throughout the entire year.

“It’s very important to identify the correct product to administer at the right time and to give it to the right animals at the proper dose,” Alley says. “All of those factors play a major role in maintaining the effectiveness of the products available today.”

Cattle must not be slaughtered within 27 days after the last treatment with Valbazen. Do not use in female dairy cattle of breeding age. Do not administer to female cattle during the first 45 days of pregnancy or for 45 days after removal of bulls. Consult your veterinarian for assistance in the diagnosis, treatment, and control of parasitism.

1 Williams JC, DeRosa A, Nakamura Y, Loyacano AF. Comparative efficacy of ivermectin pour-on, albendazole, oxfendazole and fenbendazole against Ostertagia ostertagi inhibited larvae, other gastrointestinal nematodes and lungworm of cattle. Veterinary Parasitology. 1997; 73:73-82.

All trademarks are the property of Zoetis Services LLC or a related company or a licensor unless otherwise noted. © 2021 Zoetis Services LLC. All rights reserved. GBF-00539

Sponsored by Zoetis

Data v Myths – Numbers Beat Misconceptions Every Time

Thu, 20 May 2021 18:58:18 GMT

When it comes to implanted calves there are two prevalent myths in the industry Zoetis is exposing as false. The first being around the perception that nonimplanted calves bring more profit. A four-year study of video auction market sales data proves just the opposite — implanted calves were worth more. The second misconception is implanted calves do not perform as well as nonimplanted calves. In this case, a South Dakota State University study showed implanted calves gained more pounds and profit. Read on to find out what Gary Sides, PhD, managing nutritionist with Zoetis, and Tom Short, PhD, associate director in Outcomes Research with Zoetis, have to say about this timely topic.

From cow/calf to feedlot operations, there are two common myths about implanted calves:

Myth No.1: Nonimplanted calves bring more profit on sale day than implanted calves.
Myth No.2: Nonimplanted calves outperform implanted calves in the feedyard.

Two recent studies clear up these misconceptions, according to Gary Sides, PhD, managing nutritionist with Zoetis, and Tom Short, PhD, associate director in Outcomes Research with Zoetis.

Busting Myth No.1

Implanted cattle actually bring slightly more dollars per pound on sale day. Based on video auction market sales data from 2014-2017, the data revealed nearly equal prices for implanted and nonimplanted cattle.¹ It also showed no statistical difference in sale price between implanted and nonimplanted cattle throughout the four years recorded. In fact, implanted lots of cattle sold for slightly more, numerically, than nonimplanted lots — 184.12 versus 183.03 $/cwt.¹

“If producers are not implanting their cattle, they may be leaving money on the table,” Dr. Short said.

Busting Myth No. 2

A South Dakota State University study reported implanted calves outperform nonimplanted calves in the feedyard.² In the report, steers implanted with Synovex^® C were compared with nonimplanted steers from weaning through harvest. The findings revealed hot carcass weights were 8 pounds heavier for implanted calves versus those not implanted.2

“The nonimplanted calves never caught up in the feedyard,” Dr. Sides said. “This is an amazing use of technology, as well as a little management that can help feedlot managers make the most gain and profit possible.”

Cattlemen can optimize implant results and profit for every dollar invested in their implanting program by working with processing crews to implement best-practice implanting techniques.

“If you balance your management program, as well as leverage an implant, you can really add some pounds at the end of the day,” Dr. Short said.

Learn more in this podcast featuring Drs. Sides and Short:

Additional resources, such as how-to videos on proper implanting techniques and more, can be found at NoStressSynovex.com .

Do not use Synovex products in veal calves. Refer to label for complete directions for use, precautions, and warnings.

References:
_{¹Data on file. The effects of special management programs and preconditioning programs on the sale price of beef calves marketed through Western Video Market, Zoetis Inc., 2017.}

_{²Time of suckling implant influences on weaning weight, post-weaning performance, and carcass traits in steer calves. South Dakota State University. 2015. ^{https://www.sdstate.edu/sites/default/files/ars/species/beef/beef-reports/upload/08-Pritchard-Time-of-suckling-implant-influences-on-weaning-weight.pdf}}

Sponsored by Zoetis

How Heifer Management in the First Two Years Sets Her Up for Success

Tue, 04 May 2021 13:46:59 GMT

Selecting the right heifers as replacements for the keep pen doesn’t need to be a complicated decision. Look at clear indicators such as those who were born during the first 21 days of calving, those who were treated for bovine diseases, and those who gained a steady 1.5 to 1.8 pounds a day.

Experts from the University of Nebraska and Zoetis offer valuable information and insights on how setting a heifer up for long-term success starts in her first two years of life.

The dust has cleared, the steer calves are loaded and gone to market. Now, your attention turns to the heifer replacement pen. How you manage that heifer now can set her up for a long, productive life — or failure in her first two years.

Selecting Heifers as Replacements

The first step in heifer development is selecting the right heifers for the keep pen. The time during the calving season when the heifer is born is the most important factor in determining her lifetime productivity, said Rick Funston, PhD, professor and reproductive physiologist with University of Nebraska, during the 2018 Feeding Quality Forum in Omaha, Nebraska.

“The biggest driver in cow profitability is when she was born in the breeding cycle,” said Dr. Funston. “Heifers born in the first 21 days of the calving season stay in the herd longer and wean heavier calves than heifers born in the second or third 21 days of a calving season.”

The first heifers to sell should be any heifer you treated for bovine respiratory disease as a nursing calf, according to Che Trejo, DVM, Beef Technical Services at Zoetis.

“We simply can’t reverse the lung damage after that point, and she isn’t a good replacement candidate,” Trejo said.

Preventing Disease Challenges

The next step is making sure the heifers are protected from reproductive diseases, so they have the best chance of getting bred in the first 21 days.

“It’s a shift in protecting her from respiratory disease before weaning to protecting her from reproductive disease going forward,” said Dr. Trejo. “We want to get at least 45 days past weaning before we give the first dose of modified-live virus (MLV) reproductive vaccine. The timing of brucellosis (bangs) vaccination lines up well to give the first dose in most herds.”

Dr. Trejo recommends giving two doses of an MLV reproductive vaccine prior to the heifer being bred for the first time. He suggests that producers use a vaccine, like BOVI-SHIELD GOLD FP^® 5 VL5 HB, that protects against the following diseases:

Bovine viral diarrhea (BVD) Types 1 and 2 viruses
Infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR) virus and IBR abortions
Campylobacter fetus (vibrio)
Leptospira

While most MLV vaccine labels indicate that the second dose of vaccine should be given at least 30 days prior to breeding, Paul Walz, DVM, PhD, College of Veterinary Medicine Auburn University, suggested at least 45 days prior to breeding to allow two heat cycles before breeding, during his Feeding Quality Forum presentation.

In both cases, the timing allows the heifer to have a complete immune response to the vaccination without any interference during breeding.

Nutrition and Target Weight

Adequate nutrition is critical during the heifer’s development, as well as throughout and after breeding for improved pregnancy rates. However, nutrition continues to play a key role throughout pregnancy with the ultimate goal of producing strong, vigorous calves. Traditionally, the recommendation is for heifers to reach 65 percent of their mature weight by the time they are ready to breed, said Dr. Trejo. More recent research has looked at a lower target weight (55 percent of mature weight) and its impact on breeding rates.¹

Research suggests there is some impact on artificial insemination (A.I.) conception rates, but there was not a significant difference in overall pregnancy rates between heifers developed to 55 percent of mature weight and 65 percent of mature weight.¹

“If you have the flexibility to keep more heifers than you need, then put some pressure on the heifers to breed in a lower nutritional plane,” said Dr. Trejo. “Ideally, we will develop heifers to gain between 1.5 and 2.2 pounds per day. The key is to keep her growing throughout pregnancy, her first calf and rebreeding for a second.

“Ideally, we need a heifer development strategy until they have their second calf,” said Dr. Trejo. “They aren’t cows yet because they are growing and developing, along with growing a full set of teeth.”

Dr. Trejo reiterates the following tips for developing heifers:

Select older heifers, born in the first 21 days of the season
Don’t keep any heifers treated for BRD as a nursing calf
Administer two doses of a modified-live virus vaccine with fetal protection prior to breeding
Target 1.5 to 1.8 lbs/day gain so heifers attain at least 55 percent of mature weight by breeding time

For more information on selecting vaccines in your heifer development program, talk with your Zoetis representative or local veterinarian, or visit FetalCalfProtection.com.

Reference:
¹Hall JB, Cummings, Glaze Jr. JB. Heifer nutritional development and the target weight debate, in Proceedings. Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle 2016; 131-144.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Protect Your Animals and Your Bottom Line

Tue, 04 May 2021 13:41:14 GMT

According to a recent Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) study, the costs associated with preventing young calf respiratory disease were considerably less than treating the disease after the fact. This insightful article produced by Zoetis outlines the health and financial benefits of getting young calves off to a healthy start by administrating vaccines that complement the dam’s colostrum. It’s information that’s timely and relevant to cow/calf operation owners everywhere who want to protect their business in every way.

Calving season is approaching in fall calving areas and getting those calves off to a healthy start is top of mind for cattle producers. Preventing respiratory disease is not only best for overall animal health and productivity, but recent studies demonstrate there can be an economic benefit for the cow/calf operation.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) recently published a study based on a survey of cow/calf producers in multiple states. The study evaluated and compared the costs of vaccines and vaccine administration to calves for disease protection with the medication and labor costs of treating a calf with respiratory disease.¹

The JAVMA study showed, in many cases, the costs associated with prevention — vaccine costs plus the labor cost to administer vaccines — were considerably less than the medication and labor costs to treat disease. Median vaccine cost per calf in the surveyed herds was $6.25, while labor costs were $5 for administering vaccine to calves. Medicine cost to treat a sick calf averaged $11, while treatment labor costs were $15 per calf.1 This study reveals that the cost per calf to treat respiratory disease is more than twice the cost of preventing respiratory disease.

A proven approach to the young calf’s immune system
A young calf’s immune system is unique in how it responds to viral and bacterial challenges. Calfhood vaccinations can complement what the dam provides through colostrum and help give a calf every chance to be healthy and perform to its potential. Timing and type of vaccine administration play key roles in managing the young calf’s immune response.

A Montana study looked at the impact of timing and sequence of vaccination on the immune response in nursing calves. The study demonstrated that the intranasal vaccine works with the calf’s immune system to prevent respiratory disease caused by bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV) and helps prevent respiratory disease caused by infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR) and parainfluenza 3 (PI3) virus.²“The Montana study and research out of North Dakota demonstrated that vaccination at birth can improve future responses to vaccination, while helping provide protection against respiratory diseases from birth to weaning,” ³ said Victor Cortese, DVM, PhD, director of immunology and biologicals with Zoetis.

The Montana study helps support the Zoetis recommendation to use INFORCE 3^® at birth followed by a second dose of INFORCE 3 and One Shot^® BVD to protect against BRSV, IBR, PI3, bovine viral diarrhea (BVD) Types 1 and 2 and Mannheimia haemolytica, before heading to pasture.²

Cortese concluded with three things a cow/calf producer will see from implementing young calf respiratory vaccinations:^4,5

Lower pneumonia rates
Lower death loss
Greater weight gains^.

To develop a vaccination protocol for your young nursing calves, visit with your local veterinarian, or visit CompleteCalfProtection.com to learn more about solutions from Zoetis.

About Zoetis
Zoetis is the leading animal health company, dedicated to supporting its customers and their businesses. Building on more than 65 years of experience in animal health, Zoetis discovers, develops, manufactures and commercializes medicines, vaccines and diagnostic products, which are complemented by bio devices, genetic tests and a range of services. Zoetis serves veterinarians, livestock producers and people who raise and care for farm and companion animals with sales of its products in more than 100 countries. In 2018, the company generated annual revenue of $5.8 billion with approximately 10,000 employees. For more information, visit https://www.zoetisus.com .

References:
¹ Wang M, Schneider LG, Hubbard KJ, et al. Beef producer survey of the cost to prevent and treat bovine respiratory disease in preweaned calves. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2018;253(5):617-623.
² Data on file, Study Report No. 16CARGBIO01, Zoetis Inc.
³Stokka GL, Neville B, Seeger JT, Stoltenow C, Dyer N, Gaspers JJ. Evaluation of the serologic effect of concurrent IBR, BRSV, PI3 and Mannheimia vaccination and time interval between the first and second dose on the subsequent serological response to the Mannheimia toxoid and BRSV fractions on spring-born beef calves in North Dakota. North Dakota Beef Report 2014;40-42.
⁴ Perino LJ, Hunsaker BD. A review of bovine respiratory disease field efficacy. Bov Pract. 1997;31:59-66.
⁵Mosier DA, Confer AW, Panciera RJ. The evolution of vaccines for bovine pneumonic pasteurellosis. Res Vet Sci. 1989;47:1-10.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Are Your Calves Protected Against Respiratory Disease?

Tue, 04 May 2021 13:38:25 GMT

Zoetis veterinarians see the short- and long-term damage respiratory diseases, such as pneumonia, can do to a cow/calf operation. They’ve conducted extensive field and laboratory research to identify the exact damages, even hidden costs such as lost feed efficiency and increased labor expenses. Their advice is simple: Follow a recommended program of vaccinations.

The most common cause of death in calves before weaning is respiratory disease.¹ Are your calves protected against respiratory disease challenges?

Once a calf becomes infected with respiratory disease, the damage is done, and the impact from disease will follow the animal into the next stage of production. For producers, it is important to understand the financial impact of young calf respiratory disease

Watch this short video to learn more about giving your calves a healthy start.

“When we think about respiratory disease in calves, we often forget about the [financial] impact other than just the antibiotic treatment,” said Mark Alley, DVM, veterinarian with Beef Technical Services at Zoetis.

3 hidden costs of calf respiratory disease:

Reduced calf weaning weights by up to 35 pounds²
Lost feed efficiency while nursing, as well as in the next production stage
Incurred labor costs to treat and re-treat calves

Used concurrently, Inforce 3^®and One Shot^® BVD work quickly to combat harmful bovine respiratory disease (BRD) pathogens and give calves a healthy start by providing a rapid and complete immune response.

For Laurie Johnson, a cow/calf producer in northeastern South Dakota, getting ahead of the problem with a successful vaccination program is their key to success.

“We don’t really have a lot of health challenges because we’re upfront and we’re preventing them,” Johnson said. “We’re pretty particular about our vaccine program and we work really hard to make sure we don’t have any health issues we have to treat.”

Work with your veterinarian to develop the best program to help reduce respiratory challenges. For more information, visit CompleteCalfProtection.com.

About Zoetis

Zoetis (NYSE: ZTS) is the leading animal health company, dedicated to supporting its customers and their businesses. Building on more than 60 years of experience
in animal health, Zoetis discovers, develops, manufactures and markets veterinary vaccines and medicines, complemented by diagnostic products, genetic tests, biodevices and a range of services. Zoetis serves veterinarians, livestock producers and people who raise and care for farm and companion animals with sales of its products in more than 100 countries. In 2017, the company generated annual revenue of $5.3 billion with approximately 9,000 employees. For more information, visit www.zoetisUS.com .

References:
_{¹ APHIS. Mortality of calves and cattle on U.S. Beef Cow Calf Operations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 2010
²Stokka GL. Prevention of respiratory disease in cow calf operations. Vet Clin North AM Food Anim Pract. 2010; 26 (2): 229-241}

Sponsored by Zoetis

Understanding Calf Immunity

Tue, 04 May 2021 13:36:49 GMT

Working to eliminate health issues in young calves is a critical first step in saving the beef industry millions of dollars annually through economic losses attributed to wasted feed resources, purchased pharmaceuticals, reduced performance and increased mortality.

Fast, timely reaction of the immune system from birth on helps ensure calves perform at optimal levels. Understanding the role immunity plays in setting the stage for the calf’s future is vital in preparing the calf for a lifetime of success. Active and passive immunity, combined with a planned management and nutrition strategy, form a firm foundation for calf productivity and can put ranchers on a path toward economic efficiency.

This excerpt from an article produced by Oregon State University gives an overview of the cattle immune system:

Active and Passive Immunity – Immunity is the resistance of the animal to a specific disease. Active immunity is acquired when the animal is infected by a specific pathogen, creates a “memory” against it, and successfully eliminates the disease and pathogen. The next time the animal is infected by the pathogen, the adaptive immune response will be faster and stronger (Figure 2), quickly eliminating the pathogen and preventing the disease. A common example is chicken pox in humans; once you have it you’ll never have it again. Vaccination is also an example of active immunity. By injecting the animal with a killed or weakened pathogen, which won’t be harmful enough to develop the disease, the immune system creates the “memory” and learns how to fight it if an infection occurs. Passive immunity occurs when the animal receives antibodies from an external source, such as another animal. The classical example of passive immunity is the transfer of antibodies from the cow to the calf via colostrum. This transfer is extremely important to newborn calves because their immune system is not mature enough to develop its own antibodies. The calf should be immune to most of the pathogens present in the environment because the dam has already been exposed to them and developed protective antibodies. Another example of passive immunity is the administration of specific antiserum or antitoxin to sick cattle or calves that did not receive enough colostrum.

Managing Cattle Health
In commercial beef operations, cattle are frequently exposed to health challenges. These can be bacteria, viruses, parasites, and toxins coming from the feed, air, water, wildlife, other cattle, and even humans. Stress is also an important factor regarding cattle health. Extreme temperatures, handling, transportation, weaning, and comingling are stressors that can suppress the immune system of cattle, but also trigger inflam¬matory responses. Maintaining cattle in good health is not only important for animal well-being, but also has implications on animal productivity. The immune system, as well as any other body functions, requires a significant amount of nutrients to work properly. When the animal is infected by a pathogen, a significant amount of the consumed energy and protein that were supposed to support productive functions, such as growth, reproduction, lactation, are shifted to support the immune response. These nutrients are required for production of white blood cells, support the inflammation process, multiplication of T and B cells, antibody synthesis, and many other immune processes. Therefore, maintaining cattle in good health will improve nutrient utilization and productivity. Similarly, cattle should always be maintained in adequate nutritional status so their immune system can work properly when needed. Some management considerations to improve the immune system of cattle are:

Nutrition – Energy and protein are required for every single process within the body, including the immune system. Energy serves as fuel for the synthesis and function of immune cells, whereas protein regulates and serves as structural component for cells and antibodies. Without proper energy and protein intake, the immune system and any immune response becomes impaired. Minerals are required for proper function of the immune components, such as pathogen recognition and antibody response. Although several minerals are important for overall body function, selenium, zinc, copper, and chromium are specifically important for the immune system and should always be offered to cattle in amounts that supply their requirements. Vitamins A, B6, B12, C, and E are also essential for proper immune function, and their roles typically overlap with those of minerals. Cattle should always receive adequate amounts of vitamins A and E in the diet, whereas supplementation of vitamins B and C are often not required because rumen bugs and body tissues, respectively, produce sufficient amounts of these vitamins.

Reducing Stress – Stressful situations also have negative effects on the immune system. Common stressors in beef operations are heat/cold stress, frequent handling, transport, and weaning. Prolonged stress, such as during extremely hot or cold tem¬peratures or after weaning, can suppress the immune response; therefore cattle would be more susceptible to diseases. Conversely, short-term stress, such as transport and handling, can activate the immune response, specifically the innate system. There¬fore, reducing the amount of stress to which cattle are exposed will benefit their health and, consequently, the productivity of the beef operation. During mandatory procedures, such as transport and weaning, cattle should be in adequate health and nutritional status to prevent further immune complications.

Vaccination – A well-planned vaccination calendar is essential for good health of the herd. Producers should work closely with a local veterinarian to prepare the vacci¬nation program ahead of time. Cattle should be in adequate health, proper nutritional status, and under no or low-stress to maximize the effectiveness of the vaccines.

Other Considerations – Newborn calves should always have adequate access to colostrum. Producers should make sure that pens, working facilities, lots, feed bunks, and water troughs are properly clean to prevent accumulation and growth of pathogens. Feeds should also be inspected for mold, excessive moisture, and toxins. Recently purchased cattle should be evaluated and, if necessary, quarantined to prevent foreign pathogens from entering the operation. Interactions between cattle, wildlife, and other livestock species should also be monitored to prevent spreading of interspecies diseases.

Conclusions: The immune system is a complex group of biological processes responsible for maintaining a healthy animal. An impaired immune system is detri-mental not only to animal well-being, but also to animal productivity. Beef producers should always seek management alternatives that enhance animal health, such as proper nutrition, low-stress management, and an adequate vaccination program. Understanding some of the basic features of the immune system will allow producers to better plan and handle these alternatives, and consequently enhance the efficiency of their operations.

References:
Abbas, A. K., and A. H. Lichtman. 2007. Cellular and Molecular Immunology, 6th edition. Saunders, Philadelphia, PA. Carroll, J. A., and N. E. Forsberg. 2007. Vet. Clin. Food. Anim. 23:105-149 Rich¬ley, E. J. 2003. University of Florida - IFAS Extension. Available at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/VM027.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Colostrum Consumption Impacts Calf Immunity

Tue, 04 May 2021 13:34:36 GMT

Colostrum counts. From energy and nutrients to maternal antibodies that provide passive immunity to newborn calves, colostrum intake can have life-long effects on the calf’s health. But proper colostrum production begins by first making sure cows and heifers receive adequate nutrition and immunization prior to calving.

According to researchers at Ohio State University, inadequate passive immunity can increase the likelihood of illness and death, as well as negatively impact growth performance in the feedlot.

The first seven days of a calf’s life can be critical to a cow-calf herd. Seventy percent of the pre-weaning deaths occur within the first seven days after birth in beef herds. The causes of these deaths can include low birth weights, cold weather, difficult births, and poor immunity. Genetics can influence calving difficulty and birth weights, so selecting bulls for calving ease is one step. Additionally, late-gestation nutrition can be critical, and the goals are to keep cows in adequate body condition, while not having cows too fat or too thin. A study at Louisiana State University, observed the lowest percentage of calving difficulty in heifers with a body condition score (BCS) between 5 and 6, whereas heifers with BCS 4 had lighter birth weight calves with greater calving difficulty. Weak calves due to difficult births and exposure to cold and wind can reduce the calf’s desire to get up a nurse.

In addition, the first 24 to 72 hours are critical for immunity of the calf. Calves need colostrum, which contains not only energy and nutrients, but also maternal antibodies, which provide immunity to the calf. The transfer of passive immunity through colostrum can have life-long implications. A study by Wittum and Perino at The Ohio State University investigated the long-term effects of inadequate passive immunity of the calf at birth. This study found if calf blood levels of immunoglobulin (IgG) were less than 800 mg/dL, those calves were 3 to 9 times more likely to become sick and 5 times more likely to die prior to weaning. In addition those calves averaged 35 pounds less in weaning weight and had a greater incidence of illness and death as well as lower growth performance in the feedlot.

The calf’s blood IgG levels are influenced by two things 1) the amount of maternal antibodies produced by the cow in the colostrum and 2) the ability of the calf to nurse and absorb the antibodies. Selecting cows for good maternal instincts, temperament, and udder conformation are important considerations. Again, providing adequate nutrition to the cow/heifer prior to calving to supply sufficient energy and protein is critical to production of colostrum. This can also contribute to proper fetal development and growth, which can impact the calf’s vigor and health shortly after birth and the calf’s ability to absorb those antibodies. If a farmer provides good nutrition, management, and protection from weather, the calf should get up a nurse several times during the first 12 hours. In addition, a vaccination program for the females in the herd uses the cow’s immune system to provide antibodies to the calf by colostrum, so consult a veterinarian for appropriate vaccination protocol.

If calves do not get up a nurse early or are weak, a farmer has several options to help provide passive immune transfer. The best alternative is the ‘real thing’, by either milking the calf’s dam or using frozen colostrum saved from another cow in the herd. If using frozen colostrum, thaw at room temperature or in warm water, but not in the microwave as antibodies can be denatured at higher temperatures and are then ineffective in establishing immunity. Although commercial powdered replacements are not as ideal as colostrum, they can be used as an alternative. If whole milk or electrolytes is fed first before the colostrum, this can reduce the absorption of the antibodies by the calf and is not recommended. In addition, the colostrum should be delivered through a nipple and not a drench tube, because this can tend to improve absorption by the calf. A calf should receive 5 to 6 percent of its body weight in colostrum within the first six hours of life.

The first few days are important to the lifetime health and performance of the calf, so farmers should pay close attention to make sure calves are nursing and receiving adequate colostrum. Furthermore, proper nutrition, vaccination, and management prior to calving are good strategies to improve the first week of the calf’s life as well as for his or her lifetime.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Preconditioning: Set Calves Up for Success

Tue, 04 May 2021 13:33:07 GMT

Building a strong immune system in calves begins at birth with the passive transfer of immunity through high-quality colostrum. Once weaning time comes around, calf stress can escalate as the animals are separated from their mothers, commingled and introduced to new feed. Health and performance are often compromised.

Preconditioning programs involve instituting an animal health protocol along with a balanced nutrition program before and after weaning. When combined with training calves to eat from a bunk, the 45-day growing period allows recently weaned calves an opportunity to step-up their immunity, puts them on a journey toward optimal performance in the feedyard, and gives your calves the best opportunity to build a stellar reputation with buyers.

Oklahoma State University Extension shared an in-depth study on nutrition and management considerations for preconditioning home raised beef calves. No surprise that receiving and weaning times represent the most stressful periods during a beef animal’s life. Taking action to ensure minimal stress during the weaning or receiving period is a critical step to minimize the risk and cost of disease. Management steps taken around the time of weaning to ensure optimum health and performance of cattle are often referred to as preconditioning in the cattle industry. In a small, although growing percentage of cases, some or all of these management steps are executed at the ranch of origin by the cow-calf producer. In many more cases, these management steps are taken after the sale or shipment of the calves by the stocker producer or cattle feeder. Examples of preconditioning management steps include a comprehensive animal health program including vaccinations, deworming, coccidiostat, etc.; balanced nutrition before and after weaning; training calves to eat from a bunk; and a growing or preconditioning period that usually lasts 30 to 45 days.

With a variety of cattle types, feed resources, operation sizes, and environmental conditions, no one nutritional program for receiving cattle can be recommended for all Oklahoma producers. However, research and experience have provided scientists and cattlemen with information that can be used to minimize cattle stress and improve health and weight gain during this critical period.

Preweaning and Weaning Management

Developing a strong immune system in beef calves begins with key management factors that must be acted upon prior to calving. Passive transfer of colostral (first milk) immunoglobulins is vital to short-term health as well as lifetime immune function. For example, in one experiment, calves that did not have adequate blood concentrations of immunoglobulins from the dam’s colostrum within 24 hours after birth, were three times as likely to be treated for Bovine Respiratory Disease during the feedlot phase. Please refer to Selk (OSU Fact Sheet ANSI-3358) for a detailed discussion of factors affecting passive immunity.

Any practice that reduces stress on cattle during the first few days after weaning will reduce the risk of health problems, improve calf weight gains, and minimize wear and tear on facilities and people. Many cattlemen prefer to isolate calves in a corral, drylot, or small grass trap with good fencing during the bawl-out period. It is helpful to familiarize calves with their weaning area by giving them access to it for a few days prior to weaning. If a drylot or corral is used, smaller pens are preferable to reduce fence walking or pacing. Feed bunks and hay or water troughs can be strategically placed along the fence line to discourage fence walking.

If the weaning corral is well designed and solidly constructed, the cows can be allowed adjacent access to the calves. However, the corral must be constructed so that calves cannot reach through the bars to nurse. Another practice that may help, but is not always practical, is to leave the calves in the familiar weaning area and move the cows far enough away so that they cannot hear their calves bawling. Probably the least ideal situation is to move the cows to another pasture where they can hear and see the calves, but do not have close contact. This method can work, but it requires a good fence because cows will be aggressive in their efforts to get back to their calves.

Some producers subscribe to the practice of leaving one or more older cows with the calves, thinking that the presence of at least one adult female will calm the calves. However, this practice has not proven to improve calf health, time spent at the feed bunk, or overall performance in research settings.

Another practice that seems to be growing in popularity is one of leaving cows and calves in adjacent pastures, using electric fence on either side of a barbed or woven wire fence to keep the cattle apart. This practice, referred to as fence line weaning, makes it easier to utilize high quality pasture, rather than a dusty drylot. Previous and recent exposure to electric fencing are necessary to train the calves to respect it. Initially cows will graze and rest close to the fence, but gradually begin to graze farther and farther away.

During the initial weaning period, a concentrate-feeding program should be implemented. This practice trains the cattle to come to feed, eat from a bunk, aids in health monitoring and handling, and provides a method to incorporate supplemental nutrients in the diet. A minimum of 14 days of concentrate feeding is recommended to ensure that all the cattle have been trained to eat from the bunk.

Deworming
Many forage systems in Oklahoma are favorable for the proliferation of internal and external parasites. In contrast to adult cattle, calves do not acquire full immunity to gastrointestinal parasites until about a year after they are weaned, thus weaned calves are very susceptible to internal parasites (worms). Cattle infected with internal parasites will have reduced appetites and suppressed immune function as well as reduced ability to respond to vaccination. Producers should consult their veterinarians for assistance in identifying the most appropriate product to use for their area and current conditions. In general, a broad-spectrum endectocide that is effective against inhibited O. ostertagia (brown stomach worm) should be used. O. ostertagia is thought to be one of the most damaging and frequently occurring parasites affecting beef cattle. Ivomec®, Valbazen®, Synanthic®, Cydectin®, Dectomax®, Eprinex®, or SafeGuard® (at the 2X rate) are appropriate for mid-summer deworming to control O. ostertagia.

Many preconditioning programs that require certification include deworming as one of the health management requirements. In these programs, producers usually have the option of deworming calves two to six weeks prior to weaning, at weaning, or two to three weeks after weaning. Deworming at the earliest possible date within the program’s guidelines will ensure that weight gain is not limited by parasite infestation and digestive tract damage. Additionally, the early application should improve the efficacy of the vaccine products used. In effect, applying the deworming product as early as possible (preferably two to six weeks prior to weaning) should improve the efficiency, profitability, and effectiveness of the entire preconditioning effort.

Implanting
Few, if any, beef cattle management practices are more cost effective or have a higher return on investment than properly used growth promoting implants. These implants are pellets that are implanted just under the skin, on the backside of the ear of growing calves. The pellets release extremely low concentrations of various hormones or hormone-like substances that improve average daily gain 7 percent to 17 percent and feed efficiency 4 percent to 12 percent.

Stocker producers and feedyards prefer that calves do not have an active implant present when calves arrive at their operation. This allows the stocker producers or cattle feeders to uniformly initiate their own implant strategy and minimize problems associated with overlapping implants. These problems can include a higher incidence of buller steers, advanced carcass maturity, and lower quality grade. Implants approved for suckling calves generally have an active payout period of 70 to 90 days. Therefore, cattlemen who wish to participate in certified preconditioning programs requiring a minimum of a 45-day weaning period should:

Consider implanting their steers and heifers that will NOT be retained as replacements at branding time (45 to 90 days of age)
Reimplant (if implanted at branding) or initially implant steers destined for the certified preconditioning program during the two to six week window prior to weaning
If calves cannot be implanted during the two to six week window prior to weaning, they should not be implanted at all, other than at branding
If there is any possibility that heifers could be purchased or retained for replacements, they should not be implanted more than one time under any circumstance

Implant products cleared for use in suckling calves include: Ralgro®, Synovex C®, Component E-C®, Encore®, and Compudose®.

Post-Weaning Preconditioned Nutrition
Since the nutrition program can make up 50 percent to 70 percent of the preconditioning budget, careful consideration, planning, and preparation are warranted. Several nutritional management options are available for weaning and preconditioning calves, and they vary considerably within regions of the state. In selecting an effective program, producers should first define and prioritize the objectives of the nutritional management program. Objectives might include:

Optimizing condition and health of the cattle for the next phase
Producing added weight gain at a low cost
Marketing home raised feed resources through the preconditioning program
Minimizing the risk of digestive disorders and disease during the weaning and preconditioning phase
Achieving a specific target weight for the cattle by sale or shipping date
Accomplishing the above objectives in a way that requires minimal labor and equipment investment

Producers must be cautious not to over-condition cattle that might be destined for a moderate to low plane of nutrition, such as dry wintering on native pasture or hay with minimal supplementation. Much of the weight and condition (flesh) gained during preconditioning will be lost, resulting in poor overall production efficiency. Cattle buyers with orders for cattle to go to this type of situation will not be interested in paying very much for fleshy calves that have been fed to gain more than 2 lbs per day. However, if the cattle are more likely to go directly to high quality pasture or to a feed yard where a high concentrate ration is fed, a higher rate of gain, and increased fleshiness is justified.

Preconditioning feeds must be highly palatable. Remember that freshly weaned calves will be more concerned about the absence of their mothers than eating hay or processed feeds. Consequently, feed intake will be low for three to four days, especially if the calves had not been previously exposed to feed in bunks or creep feeders. Providing highly palatable and/or familiar feeds serves to minimize the length of this fasting period resulting in improved weight gain and reduced stress during the first week after weaning.

Actual weight gain is difficult to predict accurately because it can be influenced by many factors. Some of the major factors determining weight gain during this period are listed as follows:

Health of the calves during weaning and preconditioning. Sick or parasite-infested calves obviously will not gain well.
How quickly after weaning the calves increase their feed intake.
The amount of feed or forage consumed.
The energy level of the total diet, assuming that protein, minerals, and vitamin requirements are met to sustain the energy allowable gain.
The presence of growth promoting implants and/or other feed additives.
Length of the feeding period.
Previous level of nutrition, such as cows’ milk production and preweaning pasture conditions, and the resulting flesh condition of the calves. Fleshy calves generally do not gain as rapidly as thin to moderately fleshed calves.
Genetic potential for growth, which is inherited from the calves’ sire and dam.
Weighing conditions and gut fill. Since young calves can consume between 0 percent and 4 percent of their body weight, unequal fill conditions from one weigh date to the next can cause weight swings of up to 20 to 30 lbs during short time periods.

Grazing Programs and Supplements
In many cases, the cheapest and most convenient preconditioning nutrition program is to turn calves back out on high quality pasture four to seven days after they have been weaned. The pasture should be within easy access to a corral and chute where any sick calves can be restrained for treatment if necessary. Forage quality and
availability will vary dramatically depending on species, growing conditions, previous grazing management, and time of the year.

The calves should be given access to the highest quality pasture available. Ensuring high quality pasture at the time of weaning requires considerable planning and pasture management months ahead of time. An excellent method to ensure the highest quality pasture possible is to utilize the rotational grazing technique. For the purpose of this discussion, rotational grazing will simply serve to stage an area for the calves to graze that represents immature (high quality) forage or forage regrowth. A second approach is to stage the production of high quality forage to match the timing of the preconditioning period. For example, if calves are to be sold in a special auction during late October, calves could be weaned in early September and turned out on native pasture until adequate stockpiled Bermudagrass or fescue is available. Another example would be to turn calves out on stockpiled Bermudagrass in mid-October followed by a move to an over-seeded rye pasture in mid-November.

Access to Water and Feed
There is varying opinion among producers as to whether cattle should have access to water, feed or hay, or both upon weaning or receiving. A Texas Tech study showed that when long-haul cattle (720 miles, 6.6 percent shrink) were deprived of water for six to eight hours after arrival, but were immediately offered feed, feed intake was reduced during the first week. There is no evidence to support any advantage in withholding either water or feed from cattle upon arrival. The water source should be fresh, clean, and easily located by the cattle. Many cattlemen prefer to place good quality grass hay in bunks for the first 24 hours after arrival before offering the receiving diet.

Feeding and Bunk Management
Newly received or weaned cattle should be fed at approximately the same time each day in order to establish a consistent eating time. As a result, sickness is much easier to detect because sick cattle are slower to come to the feed bunk. Twice-a-day feedings during the first one to two weeks may be advisable for young, lightweight, or highly stressed cattle. Bunks should be kept clean of manure, stale feed, and silage trash.

Feed Intake
After a period of water and feed removal, which often occurs during weaning and shipping, rumen fermentation is greatly reduced and remains low for several days after cattle are put back on feed. These changes lead to decreased appetite and feed intake. Calves that remain healthy often return to a normal appetite and steady feed intake within two weeks after arrival. However, when calves are sick upon arrival or develop a respiratory disease after arrival, feed intake is reduced further, and the length of time for an animal to return to normal is extended, as shown in Table 1. A wide range in crude protein and energy concentration is indicated in Table 2 because the level of these nutrients largely depends on animal weight, level of stress, expected feed intake, and desired weight gain.

Receiving Diet Nutrient Concentration
With dry matter intake low during the weaning or receiving period, preconditioning rations should be designed to maximize intake and provide greater concentrations of required nutrients. Refer to Table 2 for current nutrient recommendations for receiving rations intended for highly stressed calves.

Protein Source
The protein in receiving diets should be from a plant protein source, such as soybean meal, cottonseed meal, alfalfa, or wheat middlings. Stressed calves have a lower tolerance for nonprotein nitrogen (urea) than do nonstressed calves. Nonprotein nitrogen is not recommended in receiving diets for cattle weighing less than 600 lbs, and certainly should not be used in diets for calves weighing less than 350 lbs.

Feed Additives
The occurrence of subclinical coccidiosis during receiving is well known; therefore, all receiving rations should contain a coccidiostat. Coccidiosis appears to play a role in the immune response, and coccidiostats have been shown to improve feed efficiency and rate of gain during the receiving period. Feed additives approved for aiding in the prevention of coccidiosis include decoquinate (Deccox®), lasalocid (Bovatec®), and monensin (Rumensin®). A further method to control coccidiosis is to treat the water source with amprolium. A veterinarian should be consulted to determine the most effective coccidiostat in your program.

Research at several locations has shown that adding vitamin E to receiving diets can improve gain and may reduce sickness. Vitamin E should be fed between 400 IU and 500 IU/hd/day during the receiving and starting period. In general, responses to vitamin E additions in the diet have been positive. However, injections of vitamin E at processing have often been noneffective and even detrimental.

Light Calves
Calves weaned early, 6 to 16 weeks of age, and those weighing less than 350 lbs require nutrient-dense diets. Calves cannot efficiently digest moderate- and low-quality roughage. As a result, receiving diets for young, light calves should be highly palatable and higher in protein and digestible carbohydrates than receiving diets for calves weighing over 350 lbs. Programs utilizing free-choice hay as the major ingredient will not be as effective as mixed rations that are higher in concentrates. Young calves do not seem to be as prone to acidosis as yearlings, and according to New Mexico research (Lofgreen and Kirksey), prefer concentrate to roughage when stressed and sick.

Two suggested receiving diets for very young calves are shown in Table 3. These diets were developed for the purpose of early weaning, 6 to 8 weeks old, and have proven to be extremely palatable to newly received calves. Diet A has the advantage of requiring fewer commodities and no alfalfa pellets. However, Diet B is less bulky, resulting in better handling characteristics, and should flow better in self-feeders. These diets can be blended as shown; or soybean meal, minerals, and additives can be pelleted before being mixed with the cottonseed hulls, alfalfa pellets, and corn. Pelleting the supplement improves the physical characteristics of the diet and may help to stimulate intake. Cottonseed hulls are an effective fiber source and appetite stimulant. Because of their low nutrient value and relatively high cost, however, cottonseed hulls are hard to justify in most diets. Even so, cottonseed hulls are very palatable to cattle, and calves will often consume unfamiliar feeds more readily when cottonseed hulls are added.

The protein and energy content of these diets is much higher than would be required in yearling programs. However, these levels are necessary for small calves with high protein and energy needs, but with a relatively low feed intake. Consumption of the diets shown in Table 3 should be 3 percent of body weight within two weeks, and calves should gain between 1.75 lbs and 2.25 lbs per day.

Both diets shown in Table 3 are intended to be fed as complete rations. Other roughage sources should not be provided. If hay is offered, some calves may only consume hay. The result is a nutrient-deficient diet. Energy deficiency in lightweight calves can severely depress the immune system and increase the incidence of sickness.

Calves Weaned at Normal Age
For calves weaned at 6 to 8 months of age or weighing over 350 lbs, receiving programs based on either roughage diets or high concentrate diets can be effective. The decision as to which nutritional program to use will often depend on the availability of resources on the farm or ranch and the advantages and disadvantages of the programs.

There is an apparent trade-off between rate and efficiency of weight gain and sickness in concentrate- versus roughage-based receiving programs. Research from New Mexico (Lofgreen and Kirksey) indicates that weight gain and feed efficiency are improved, but incidence of sickness is slightly increased with receiving diets containing high concentrate, 75 percent, in comparison to a prairie hay diet supplemented with a high-protein pellet as shown in Table 4. Other research has shown a trend of increased sickness as concentrate in the diet is increased from 25 percent to 75 percent of diet dry matter.

Concentrate diets that are moderate to low in starch content and formulated with highly digestible fiber sources, such as distillers grains, wheat middlings, and soybean hulls, may reduce the incidence of sickness as well as the risk of acidosis. At the same time, rate and efficiency of gain should be similar to that of receiving diets based on grain.

Table 5 includes three suggested weaning or receiving diets for calves and yearlings weighing 400 lbs or more. All of these diets use cottonseed hulls as the fiber source or scratch factor, which is important in stimulating rumen motility and reducing acidosis. As mentioned before, cottonseed hulls do not contribute a great deal from a nutrient standpoint, but are very palatable to cattle and can be justified during the critical receiving period. Diet C in Table 5 is a more traditional mix based on corn and alfalfa pellets and has been used in Oklahoma for several years with success. Diets D and E are based on the palatable byproduct feeds of corn distillers grains, wheat middlings, and soybean hulls, respectively.

Such feeds provide a greater proportion of digestible fiber with moderate to low starch content. These formulations may also provide an opportunity to cut costs when byproduct feeds are under priced relative to other commodities.

For Diets C and E, a supplement pellet can be made from soybean meal, minerals, vitamins, and additives. If a supplement is desired for Diet D, a portion of corn can be mixed with the minerals, vitamins, and additives. Because corn does not make a good quality pellet, this supplement should be mixed and blended as a meal with the remaining ingredients of the diet.

Roughage-based programs often require more labor and covered storage space, as in the case of small square bales. However, if an abundance of high-quality hay is produced on the farm or ranch, producers often prefer a hay-based receiving program rather than purchasing expensive concentrate feeds. Weight gain will be considerably lower compared to concentrate programs; however, added gain during receiving, resulting from a high concentrate receiving program, is often lost before the end of a low-input dry winter grazing program. Conversely, if cattle are to be placed on high-quality pasture or enter the finishing phase immediately after the receiving period, higher rates of gain during receiving may be apparent.

In situations where 0.5 to 1.5 lbs per day gain during the receiving period is acceptable, high-quality grass hay, which is clean, palatable, and free of mold, plus 2 lbs of a high protein supplement has worked well in research trials and for many producers. The supplement should contain the necessary protein, minerals, vitamins, and feed additives needed to meet the recommended nutrient levels indicated in Table 2. Research and producer experience indicate that although this receiving program does not promote rapid gain, it does minimize health and digestive disorders. A high protein supplement that has worked well with native hay receiving programs in Oklahoma is shown in Table 6.

Conclusion
It is important for producers to help reduce cattle stress during both the weaning phase and the receiving phase. Taking action to ensure minimal stress during the weaning or receiving period is a critical step to minimize the risk and cost of disease. A good preconditioning program will allow for the optimum health and performance of cattle. Because the usefulness of a program depends on the individual operation, producers should use the information presented here to develop a specific preconditioning plan that will likely be beneficial to their businesses.

References
Gill, D.R., and R.A. Smith (1988) Nutrition, Health and Management of Newly Arrived Stressed Stocker Cattle. Oklahoma Beef Cattle Manual (2nd Edition), 85-105.

Hutcheson, D.P., and N.A. Cole (1986) Management of Transit-Stress Syndrome in Cattle: nutritional and Environmental Effects. Journal of Animal Science 62:555.

Lofgreen, G.P., and R.E. Kirksey (1982) Effect of Receiving Rations on Subsequent Performance on Grass. Livestock Research Briefs. New Mexico State University. p. 17-23.

Lofgreen, G.P. et al. (1980) Effects of Dietary Energy, Free Choice Alfalfa Hay and Mass Medication on Calves Subjected to marketing and Shipping Stresses. Journal of Animal Science 50:590.

National Research Council. (2000) Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle (7th Edition). National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Selk, G. (2002) Disease Protection for Baby Calves. OSU Extension Fact Sheet ANSI-3358, Cooperative Extension Service, Oklahoma State University.

David Lalman
Professor, Extension Beef Cattle Specialist

Don Gill
Regents Professor Emeritus

Greg Highfill
Area Extension Livestock Specialist

Jack Wallace
Former Area Extension Livestock Specialist

Kent Barnes
Former Area Extension Livestock Specialist

Chuck Strasia
Area Extension Livestock Specialist

Bob LeValley
Area Livestock Specialist

Sponsored by Zoetis

Reasons Why Strong Calves Start With Spring Vaccinations

Fri, 30 Apr 2021 19:09:05 GMT

Find Out How to Give Calves the Strongest Start

When it comes to giving your calves the best start, it’s important to know the benefits of vaccinations administered in the spring to protect against viral diseases that cause respiratory challenges. Zoetis veterinarians credit spring vaccinations with limiting disease in the summer months, especially pneumonia. Find out about spring vaccinations and how to give your calves the strong start they deserve.

Focus on complete immunity for the calf with spring vaccinations

It’s never too early to think about a calf’s respiratory health. The steps producers take this spring with young calves not only help protect them through grazing season, but can prepare the calves for a more complete immune response with pre-weaning and weaning booster vaccinations.

“The goal for vaccinating calves in the spring is primarily geared toward limiting disease in the summer months, especially pneumonia when calves are on grass,” says Catherine Maguire, technical services veterinarian with Zoetis.

Maguire says it is key to protect calves against viral diseases that cause respiratory challenges like bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV), infectious bovine respiratory (IBR) disease and parainfluenza 3 (PI₃).

“Respiratory viruses are our primary concern. When we couple Inforce 3^® with One Shot^® BVD, we achieve comprehensive viral protection, in addition to Mannheimia haemolytica protection,” Maguire says. “And that first dose of vaccine for Mannheimia really helps improve the response to the second dose at pre-weaning when bacterial pathogens are a bigger threat.”

Inforce 3 has the unique ability to stimulate a comprehensive local and systemic immune response
in very young calves, even when antibodies from their dam’s colostrum are still active. This helps Inforce 3 be effective in a wide-ranging age of calves at branding and turnout.

Following springtime vaccination with an injectable modified-live combination vaccine, like Bovi-Shield Gold One Shot^®, at preweaning or weaning, provides an additive and synergistic immune response for calves prior to entry into feedlots.

Research at North Dakota State University demonstrated a significant (p=0.006) immune response to BRSV in calves given Inforce 3 at approximately 74 days of age, and again when boosted 153 days later with Bovi-Shield Gold One Shot.¹

Overall, spring calf vaccinations are the first step in giving calves a strong foundation to meet disease challenges in the future.

For more information on developing a complete calf respiratory program, visit with your veterinarian or Zoetis representative.

_{¹Stokka GL, Neville B, Seeger JT, Stoltenow C, Dyer N, Gaspers JJ. Evaluation of the serologic effect of concurrent IBR, BRSV, PI3 and Mannheimia vaccination and time interval between the first and second dose on the subsequent serological response to the Mannheimia toxoid and BRSV fractions on spring-born beef calves in North Dakota. North Dakota Beef Report 2014;40-42.}

_{All trademarks are the property of Zoetis Services LLC or a related company or a licensor unless otherwise noted. © 2021 Zoetis Services LLC. All rights reserved. INF-00155}

_{Sponsored by Zoetis}

Unseen Damage From Parasites Can Steal From Your Bottom Line

Mon, 22 Mar 2021 18:21:18 GMT

Deworming your calves can keep your bottom line healthy. The first step is understanding the limits of current management practices. That’s why it’s important for you to work with a veterinarian to do diagnostics and determine what is working in your parasite control program. Dr. Mark Alley, DVM, senior technical service veterinarian, Zoetis, puts it in perspective when he says, “Not deworming nursing calves is probably the biggest obstacle that we have to overcome. Most [producers] just don’t think it’s an issue.”

Despite great progress in controlling parasites, too many operations fail to consider active ingredients for specific parasite challenges — or even deworming at all. Failure to deworm calves in the spring can limit the calf’s ability to reach its full genetic potential.

Advancements have made parasite infestations primarily a subclinical issue, so producers assume there is no problem because they don’t see obvious clinical symptoms or death losses, said Dr. Mark Alley, DVM, senior technical service veterinarian, Zoetis. Because the infestations are subclinical, it’s hard to visualize the calves may be 10 pounds lighter, but, as Dr. Alley said, “In the sale check, that makes a difference.”

“Not deworming nursing calves is probably the biggest obstacle that we have to overcome,” he said. “Most just don’t think it’s an issue.

“Part of the reason for these management decisions comes down to the success of macrocyclic lactones in stopping the loss of cattle due to brown stomach worm (Ostertagia) infestations,” Dr. Alley said. For a time, the industrywide urgency of that problem took the focus away from working to control internal parasites like Cooperia, Nematodirus and Haemonchus. And, as time went on, veterinarians discovered benzimidazole dewormers treated those parasites much more effectively than macrocyclic lactones did.

The first step is understanding the limits of current management practices. It is important for cattle producers to work with a veterinarian to do diagnostics and determine what is working in their parasite control program.

As Dr. Alley explains, there are some challenges at the cow/calf level understanding which parasite is present. It is believed older cows develop some resistance to Cooperia. Cooperia, Nematodirus and Haemonchus typically are a greater parasite challenge in younger animals. “But the only real way to determine which parasites are present is to get cultures or PCR [polymerase chain reaction] of the eggs from fecal samples,” Dr. Alley said.

An example Dr. Alley shares is the assumption that winter weather kills a lot of parasites, specifically the larvae and eggs in the environment. “In reality, cold weather doesn’t have a very big impact at all on them,” Dr. Alley said.

As soon as warm weather returns enough to grow grass, the parasite resumes its life cycle on the pastures.

“As a result, we get really short grass that’s just greening up, and with the right-size, right-age calf, they’re going to start nibbling on grass,” Dr. Alley said. “And when they do graze, they may be consuming some parasites with their first forage consumption.”

Dr. Alley recommends cow/calf producers work closely with their veterinarian to develop an effective parasite control program for cows and calves that addresses the parasite challenges in their geographic area.

For more information, visit GetLessParasites.com for solutions from Zoetis.

_{Image Credit: Zoetis United States}

Sponsored by Zoetis

Suckling Calves Show Significant Increase From Implants

Fri, 19 Feb 2021 16:24:07 GMT

Strategic approach, timed for animal’s development, can maximize pounds gained

Dr. Gary Sides, beef and feedlot nutritionist with Zoetis, recently discussed the weight gain benefits of implant use in suckling calves on his Field Observations podcast. The two university studies revealed significant results for weight gain through the feedlot phase compared with nonimplanted cattle. “If a producer implants calves from mature cows at branding, but delays implanting until preconditioning calves from younger cows, the overall response was an additional 35 pounds in weaning weights versus nonimplanted calves,” Sides said. “If calves from all ages of cows were implanted at the same time during branding, the growth response averaged 24 pounds of gain.” This is promising news for livestock producers throughout the country.

Recent studies of implant use in suckling calves revealed promising results for weight gain through the feedlot phase compared with nonimplanted cattle. In these studies, the nonimplanted cattle control groups simply couldn’t catch up to the implanted animals.

In the Field Observations podcast , Dr. Gary Sides discussed research studies from South Dakota State University and New Mexico State University that resulted in the significant weight gain demonstrated by strategic implanting. Listen to the podcast for the New Mexico State University results when the study was conducted with heifers.

The South Dakota State study was repeated over two consecutive years in Angus and Angus/Limousin cross steer calves on a ranch in western South Dakota. The treatment groups included:

Nonimplanted control group
Implanted with SYNOVEX^®C at branding in May
Implanted with SYNOVEX C at preconditioning in late August

The results, Sides revealed on the podcast, showed a significant increase in weaning weights of steer calves that could be maximized using an implant strategy based on the age of the dam.¹

“If a producer implants calves from mature cows at branding, but delays implanting until preconditioning calves from younger cows, the overall response was an additional 35 pounds in weaning weights versus nonimplanted calves,” Sides said. “If calves from all ages of cows were implanted at the same time during branding, the growth response averaged 24 pounds of gain.

“So, the thing to remember here is that our producers need to match the potency of the implant to the nutritional status of the animal at the time of administration, with the dam’s age in mind.”

Sides discussed what a possible implant program based on these results would look like.

Implant all heifers and steer calves with SYNOVEX C at time of branding (those that are at least 45 days of age and that come from dams 4 years of age or older).
Implant all heifers and steer calves from 2-3-year-old cows at a later date, such as at preconditioning in August or September.
For calves from mature cows that are too young to implant at branding or less than 45 days or older, brand those calves at a later date and also implant at a later date, at preconditioning along with the calves from the 2-3-year-old cows.

Implants demonstrate success elsewhere, too

The use of SYNOVEX^®One Grass and SYNOVEX C in studies conducted in Oregon and Washington also demonstrated that performance in suckling calves produced lifetime total gain throughout their lifetime superior to nonimplanted calves.²

Three groups of suckling calves were studied during a 200-day grazing period in Oregon and a subsequent 193-day feedlot period in Washington. Here are the results from that study.

Implanted with SYNOVEX One Grass: Total gain advantage 45 pounds
- ADG over 200-day suckling: 2.15 pounds
- ADG over 193-day feedlot period: 3.79 pounds
- Lifetime ADG of 2.75 pounds
Implanted with SYNOVEX C: Total gain advantage 37.3 pounds
- ADG over 200-day suckling: 2.08 pounds
- ADG over 193-day feedlot period: 3.84 pounds
- Lifetime ADG of 2.73 pounds
Nonimplanted control group
- ADG over 200-day suckling: 1.95 pounds
- ADG over 193-day feedlot period: 3.8 pounds
- Lifetime ADG of 2.66 pounds

Visit NoStressSynovex.com to find the implant to fit your needs or visit with your herd veterinarian.
Do not use SYNOVEX products in veal calves. Refer to label for complete directions for use, precautions, and warnings.

References:
¹ Pritchard, RH; Taylor, AR; Holt, SM; Bruns, KW; and Blalock, HM. Time of Suckling Implant Influences on Weaning Weight, Post-weaning Performance, and Carcass Traits in Steer Calves. South Dakota Beef Report; 2015: 40-45.
² Data on file, Study Report No. 18CRGIMP-01-01b, Zoetis Inc.

Sponsored by Zoetis

The Right Vaccine for the Right Pathogen is the Key to Deadly Disease Prevention Success

Mon, 01 Feb 2021 19:19:19 GMT

Zoetis has done extensive research on bovine respiratory diseases (BRD), such as Mannheimia haemolytica, and how these illnesses cost the industry millions each year. While M. haemolytica is found naturally in the respiratory tract of a cow, without the proper vaccination, it can travel fast and cause sudden or acute pneumonia, often resulting in death within a day’s time. It can be a devastating situation, yet one that can also be prevented. All it takes is the right vaccine for the right pathogen administered at the right time.

From 2011 to 2015, bovine respiratory disease (BRD) in nursing calves cost the beef industry approximately $165 million each year.¹ Of the bacterial causes of BRD, M. haemolytica is the most predominant and concerning of the group.²Animals with an M. haemolytica infection can go from seemingly healthy to deceased in a day’s time.

Prevention starts with understanding how pathogens act
M. haemolytica is found naturally in the respiratory tract of cattle. Dust, stress or viral infections make it easier for the bacteria to travel from the respiratory tract to the lungs. Because of multiple virulence factors, M. haemolytica is an expert at avoiding the animal’s immune defenses and remains tough to clear once an infection occurs.

“M. haemolytica typically causes more sudden or acute pneumonia and other BRD bacterial pathogens are commonly secondary invaders causing more chronic pneumonia,” said Jeffrey Sarchet, DVM, Beef Technical Services veterinarian with Zoetis.

M. haemolytica produces leukotoxin, which kills white blood cells and leads to severe lung damage. Enzymatic proteins from the affected white blood cells destroy lung cells, causing lung lesions that produce irreversible, and potentially fatal, damage to cattle. Cattle have an extremely low ratio of lung volume to body size, so any lung damage is detrimental to an animal’s overall health and performance.

“Other bacterial pathogens, like Pasteurella multocida, don’t produce leukotoxin, so they don’t cause the severe acute lung damage that M. haemolytica does,” Dr. Sarchet said.

Protecting against M. haemolytica
M. haemolytica is opportunistic and often strikes when a viral infection has weakened the animal’s immune defenses. Effective control requires vaccines providing viral protection, along with anti-leukotoxin antibodies that help block the effect of leukotoxins and capsular antibodies to increase the ability of white blood cells to engulf and destroy the bacteria.

“One Shot^® has proven efficacy for stimulating protection against M. haemolytica and reducing lung lesions,” Dr. Sarchet said. “Unfortunately, vaccines available for other BRD bacterial pathogens, like Pasteurella multocida and Histophilus somnus, have not demonstrated the same efficacy of One Shot based on research from University of Minnesota. Because Pasteurella multocida and Histophilus somnus are also Gram-negative bacteria, adding vaccines to protect against these pathogens can add stress and increase the risk of adverse reactions, so the cost/benefit should be carefully considered.”³

Dr. Sarchet explains that Gram-negative bacteria have endotoxins in the cell wall, which are very potent toxins that cause a stress response in cattle resulting in increased heart and respiratory rate, decreased rumen and intestinal action, fever, vascular shock and possibly death.

“A general rule is to not give an animal more than two or three Gram-negative vaccines at the same time,” Dr. Sarchet said. “Even though blackleg (seven- or eight-way clostridial) vaccines are Gram-positive, we count them as one-half a Gram-negative vaccine. So, for example, if we give One Shot with a seven- or eight-way clostridial vaccine at the same time, it would count as 1½ Gram-negative vaccines. If we add a vaccine to protect against Pasteurella multocida or Histophilus somnus at the same time, it would push the protocol to 2½ to 3½ Gram-negative vaccines, which is a higher risk for the animal.”

Research has shown vaccines with leukotoxoid, like what is found in the One Shot^® line of vaccines, can help stimulate effective anti-leukotoxin antibodies against M. haemolytica.⁴ Surface antigens in One Shot have been proven to stimulate production of antibodies which increase the ability of white blood cells to engulf and destroy M. haemolytica bacteria before it can cause lung damage.⁴

One Shot has also been shown to decrease the amount and severity of lung lesions in cattle infected with M. haemolytica in organized studies because the adjuvanted leukotoxoid from One Shot helps ensure production of predictably higher antibody levels and more effective M. haemolytica protection.^3,4 A comparative study of Zoetis products showed that after 21 days of M. haemolytica exposure, One Shot mitigated 74.5%-79.6% of lesions and prevented 89.4% of mortality within the treatment group.⁴

“Choosing the right vaccine for the right pathogen is key in helping reduce respiratory disease,” Dr. Sarchet said. “Your herd veterinarian is a great resource to develop a protocol that will prevent problems from Mannheimia haemolytica.”

For more information on respiratory vaccination programs, talk to your local veterinarian or visit CompleteCalfProtection.com or UncompromisedProtection.com to learn more about solutions offered by Zoetis for combating BRD pathogens.

About Zoetis
Zoetis is the leading animal health company, dedicated to supporting its customers and their businesses. Building on more than 65 years of experience in animal health, Zoetis discovers, develops, manufactures and markets veterinary vaccines, medicines and diagnostics, which are complemented by genetic tests, biodevices and a range of services. Zoetis serves veterinarians, livestock producers and people who raise and care for farm and companion animals with sales of its products in more than 100 countries. In 2018, the company generated annual revenue of $5.8 billion with approximately 10,000 employees. For more information, visit www.zoetisus.com.

References:
¹ Wang M, Schneider LG, Hubbard KJ, Smith DR. Cost of bovine respiratory disease in preweaned calves on US beef cow/calf operations (2011-2015). JAVMA. 2018;253(5):624-631.
² Griffin D, Chengappa MM, Kuszak J, McVey DS. Bacterial pathogens of the bovine respiratory disease complex. Vet Clin Food Anim. 2010;26:381-394.
³ Srinand S, Maheswaran SK, Ames TR, Werdin RE, Hsuan SL. Evaluation of three commercial vaccines against experimental bovine pneumonic pasteurellosis. Vet Microbio. 1996;52:81-89.
⁴ Data on file, Study Report No. 3131W-60-11-843, Zoetis, Inc.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Recipe for Calf Health

Mon, 01 Feb 2021 19:16:53 GMT

Texas rancher Tracy Woods wants to give every calf a good start. For him, that means starting calves off with an intranasal vaccine to help head off respiratory diseases and boost protective antibodies.

The senior director of ranch operations for 44 Farms in Cameron, Texas, Woods worked closely with the operation’s local veterinarian and animal health representatives to develop a protocol for adding protection against respiratory diseases and other health problems such as bovine viral diarrhea (BVD).

“The first six to eight weeks are some of the most stressful on the calf,” Woods says. “If the cow can give that calf protection through colostrum, that’s the best but we’re boosting it with an intranasal.

”With that strategy in place, Woods says he’s seen marked differences in calf health. “The biggest thing that showed us it was working was simply the reduction in sickness we had in those young nursing calves,” he explains.

Timely Health Strategies

While maternal antibodies are key to young calf health, once the animal reaches three months of age, its ability to respond to vaccines increases, according to Jason Douglas, a licensed production medicine representative with Oklahoma Beef Consultants, Hinton, Oklahoma.

Douglas says a first round of vaccinations given at three to four months of age, followed by a second round at pre-weaning or weaning helps protect the calf against diseases it might encounter at the home ranch and beyond.

Five-way viral vaccines administered at the calf stage can help form a foundation that can be built on throughout the calf’s life, Douglas says. Targeting prevention of viruses such as infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR), BVD Types 1 and 2, and bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV), as well as parainfluenza-3 (PI3), can be used as a baseline, he adds.

“We not only need to start thinking about that calf vaccination in terms of what he could get sick from while I own him but what he’s likely to get sick from when he leaves my place,” Douglas says. “The safer and healthier I can have that animal perform all the way through is important.

”Intranasal vaccines like those Woods administers to calves on his ranch help build good, solid respiratory foundations, Douglas adds. And, he says they can be given as early as three days of age.

Think Fundamentals First

In addition to a sound vaccination program, Douglas says managing both the calves and cows in the least stressful way possible helps pave the way for success.

Fundamentally, that means starting with a healthy animal.

“So often, people don’t understand that nutrition and health go hand-in-hand,” Douglas says. “The immune system is like a gas engine and trace minerals are the fuel. Poor or diluted fuel won’t allow the engine to run optimally, and with an empty tank, it won’t run at all. It’s also important to note that times of stress rev the engine up requiring more fuel to keep it going.”

According to both Douglas and Woods, working one-on-one with a veterinarian to develop a nutrition and vaccination program that fits the ranch environment is the first step in developing a successful herd health program.

“Start formulating a plan based off of what that animal’s needs are,” Douglas advises.

Regardless of whether the rancher is retaining ownership or sending calves direct to the feedyard, Woods encourages producers to do everything possible to add value to the end product.

“We want to keep those calves as healthy as possible so we can get them heavier,” Woods says. “We give them every chance we can to get them there.”

Sponsored by Zoetis

The Power of Parasiticides – Understanding Active Ingredients for Optimum Outcomes

Mon, 01 Feb 2021 14:55:15 GMT

Even the best intentions can cause unfortunate results. Take parasiticides, for example. Using the wrong parasite control can actually have the opposite intended effect of diminishing parasites in livestock.

Zoetis, a leading animal health company, gives sound advice in using parasiticides judiciously by identifying common active ingredient families and providing tips for developing a proper management plan.

Using parasiticides in cattle without considering the active ingredients in those products presents dangers for an operation. Using different parasiticide active ingredients can extend the effectiveness of parasite control products and play a significant role in the management of healthier cattle.

Some common, yet misguided, management practices can lead to an operation unintentionally increasing resistance in parasites. One type of parasiticide — macrocyclic lactones — saw the first documented case of resistance approximately 14 years ago, and now Cooperia and Haemonchus parasites have been demonstrated as resistant to macrocyclic lactones in more than half of all operations examined.¹ Of course parasites must be dealt with, but producers need to find a balance in their management practices.

Here are three common active ingredient families and how they work to control parasites:

Benzimidazoles — This active ingredient family depletes energy reserves in parasite cells and inhibits the elimination of waste — actions that appear to play an essential role in having a lethal effect on worms because it prolongs the time the parasite is exposed to the drug.²
Macrocyclic lactones — Microscopic worms experience paralyzed pharynx, body wall and uterine muscle when exposed to macrocyclic lactones, which leads to death.²This active ingredient works by binding to receptors that open up parts of the nematode to allow the influx of chemicals that cause the paralysis.
Imidazothiazoles — This group of parasite control products stimulates muscle contractions in worms that leads to paralysis.²

The judicious use of parasiticides with different modes of action will control parasites in a herd and also help keep products effective longer in the industry. Keep these tips in mind when developing a management plan for parasiticides:

Dosing is based on accurate weight. Underdosing is a contributing factor to parasite resistance.³ Accurate weights help drive accurate dosing, which can help ensure product efficacy.
Careful management practices. A growing trend calls for replacing the current practice of repeated dosing of whole groups of animals with a move to targeted selective treatments to animals showing clinical signs or reduced productivity.⁴
Use different active ingredients to reduce risk. Most of the commonly used parasiticides are either benzimidazoles, macrocyclic lactones or imidazothiazoles. Thus, resistance to one particular compound may be accompanied by resistance to other members of the same group — also known as side-resistance.⁴ Theoretically, resistance may be delayed by using products with different modes of action annually between dosing seasons.⁴

For more information on parasite control products and solutions, talk to your Zoetis representative or visit GetLessParasites.com.

References:
¹ Gasbarre LC. Anthelmintic resistance in cattle nematodes in the US. Vet Parasitol. 2014;204(1-2):3-11.
² Mechanisms of Action of Anthelmintics. Veterinary Manual website. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/pharmacology/anthelmintics/mechanisms-of-action-of-anthelmintics. Accessed Dec. 27, 2018.
³ Safety of Anthelmintics. Veterinary Manual website. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/pharmacology/anthelmintics/safety-of-anthelmintics. Accessed Dec. 27, 2018.
⁴Resistance to Anthelmintics. Veterinary Manual website. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/pharmacology/anthelmintics/resistance-to-anthelmintics. Accessed Dec. 27, 2018.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Prevention That Pays

Fri, 29 Jan 2021 21:46:22 GMT

Sound nutrition. Sound management. These two simple tools not only help form the foundation for building healthy, productive animals in a cow herd but also help establish calf performance and reproductive success in future replacement females.

“Goals for infectious disease prevention in heifers should include high levels of protective immunity to reproductive disease agents at the time of breeding in the highest percentages of heifers in the group as possible,” explains Dr. Dale Grotelueschen, University of Nebraska professor emeritus.

Still, creating a reproductive health program that fits the production system of the individual herd doesn’t just happen overnight.

According to Grotelueschen, nutrition, genetics, managing disease risk, including matching the cow herd to its available resources are all basics of a good reproductive health program.

“Vaccinations beginning at pre-weaning and continuing at weaning time help lay the foundation for highly protective herd-breeding-time immunity,” Grotelueschen explains.

For Texas rancher Tracy Woods, sound reproductive health begins before a cow or heifer is ever bred. A good nutrition plan is key to ensuring heifers are on track for a successful breeding season, he says, and that includes evaluating the weight progress of those females.

“A good mineral, vaccine and an anti-parasite program are paramount also,” Woods says. “I think this starts back with the cow at neonatal programming. As calves, we start from ground zero.”

The protocol includes a modified live vaccine like BOVI-SHIELD GOLD FP pre-breeding, followed by an intranasal such as INFORCE 3 at birth for the calves. At branding, Woods says preventive care includes BOVI-SHIELD GOLD ONE SHOT as well as an autogenous pinkeye vaccine and dewormer. Calves are boosted at pre-weaning or weaning and then boosted again post-weaning with straight BOVI-SHIELD GOLD 5.

Woods, who is the senior director of ranch operations for 44 Farms based in Cameron, Texas, says administering a modified live vaccine with fetal protection to both cows and heifers when confirming pregnancy helps further set the stage for success.

Grotelueschen says, when addressing the reproductive vaccination needs of the cow herd, cattlemen should evaluate their overall management system.

“Are you expanding your herd?” he questions. “That changes disease risk. So, evaluate those risks and incorporate preventative vaccines and preventative management into your system that will control those risks across the spectrum of reproductive and scours control.”

He adds that scours vaccines should be administered according to label to the pregnant female prior to colostrum development.

“Colostral proteins are derived from the plasma or serum in the blood,” he explains. “So, we want those vaccines to stimulate immunity that can translate into really excellent quality colostrum in regard to the agents that are in the vaccine.”

Grotelueschen says developing health protocols that are accompanied by both reproductive and production goals is an important step in measuring an operation’s profitability. For developing heifers, he says that means targeting reproductive disease prevention prior to weaning.

“Successful reproductive outcomes are critical components for profitability and therefore, sustainability of cattle enterprises,” Grotelueschen says. “Work closely with your veterinarian to develop a health protocol that fits your herd and your goals.”

For Woods, the bottom line is getting cows pregnant and calves weaned, healthy and on feed. “Vaccines look expensive upfront, but antibiotics are even more expensive; and a dead calf, whether it be at weaning time or at birth, is extremely costly,” he says. “Prevention is expensive. But in the end, it pays for itself.”

Sponsored by Zoetis

The Work to Controlling BVDV Transmission Begins with Biosecurity

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:32:03 GMT

Dr. Paul Walz, professor of pathology at Auburn University, has tremendous knowledge of bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) and how effective measures to controlling it starts with biosecurity, including the importance of simply taking the time to test.

As with most disease management programs, immunization is key. Working with your local diagnostic lab will offer the support and guidance necessary for success.
Bovine viral diarrhea virus continues to be a vexing problem for cow/calf producers. BVDV is spread in multiple ways and the risk control effort needs to have a multi-pronged approach.

According to Dr. Walz, there are three steps to controlling BVDV infections:

Biosecurity
Immunization
Testing

Vaccinating is the act of giving the animal a vaccine, explained Dr. Walz, while immunization is when the animal has an immune response to the vaccine. He said ideally producers will give two doses of modified-live virus reproductive vaccine in replacement heifers before they are bred for the first time, with the last dose given approximately 30 days prior to breeding.

Annual revaccination with a modified-live virus vaccine, like Bovi-Shield Gold FP^®5 VL5, gives effective protection against BVDV infections. If a modified-live virus program in the mature cowherd doesn’t work for the operation, a killed BVDV reproductive vaccine, like CattleMaster Gold FP^® 5, at pregnancy check time can also provide protection for the herd against BVDV infection.

Once producers have established a strong vaccination protocol for the cow herd, it is time to look beyond immunization to apply additional tools and management to reduce BVDV risks.

A cow persistently infected (PI) with BVDV will always have a calf that is persistently infected with BVDV. Dr. Walz points out the PI calf is a central figure in how BVDV maintains itself within a herd and how BVDV travels from herd to herd. But the risk for spreading BVDV extends throughout an operation, to equipment, visitors to the farm and fence-line contact among animals.

With so many avenues of BVDV transmission, the work to control the risk begins with biosecurity.

“We cannot rely on immunization to 100% prevent PI infections, nor can we look at our diagnostic test to pick up every single PI animal, so biosecurity is a really good way to reduce risk,” Dr. Walz said.

The main path for BVDV introduction to a herd is through new cattle. The “Trojan dam” — a highly immune cow that is a PI carrier in its reproductive tract and uterus — makes detection difficult, explained Dr. Walz. The cow would pass any test for BVDV, but it is, nonetheless, an infected animal. Producers who purchase pregnant animals, or are bringing them back from a heifer raiser, must contain them for biosecurity purposes to reduce BVDV spread.
“If at all possible, test for PI status of the newborn calves on the new cows rather than allowing those cows to calve within the general population of cows,” Dr. Walz said.

Dr. Walz shared some other essential components of effective biosecurity measures:

Avoid bringing in new animals unless they’ve been tested.
Isolate sick animals from healthy ones.
Move dead animals away from the barn.
Pay special attention to young animals.
Practice general hygiene — soap, water and general disinfection.
Monitor visitors and be aware of how they can transmit BVDV from farm to farm.

The importance of taking the time to test

“We have excellent tests available for BVDV,” Dr. Walz said. “We have better tests for BVDV than we have for a lot of our other diseases, including infectious bovine rhinotracheitis.”

Dr. Walz said testing the newborn calf is essentially testing the dam, and knowing those results can set in motion biosecurity measures and other steps. There are numerous ways to test, and working with a diagnostic laboratory can help produce the most useful results.

“Your diagnostic lab is a tremendous resource for testing, but also a tremendous resource for information on how to test and when to test,” Dr. Walz said.

For more information on biosecurity and taking steps to reduce the risk of BVDV, work with your local veterinarian, or visit FetalCalfProtection.com to learn about vaccine options from Zoetis to help protect the cow and unborn calf.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Ear-Marked at Birth

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:31:59 GMT

According to two University of Nebraska research studies, key information to help identify heifers with a tendency to be successful replacements is known the day those females are born. Dr. Rick Funston, beef reproductive physiologist at the UNL West Central Research and Extension Center, conducted the experiments. The 2012 Nebraska Beef Cattle Report, “Effect of Calving Period on Heifer Progeny,” and the corresponding report published in 2016, “Effect of Dam Age on Offspring Productivity,” outline how the date when the heifer is born in a calving season, as well as the age of her dam, greatly affect her success in becoming pregnant as a yearling heifer and later as a two-year-old.

As Funston’s data suggests, cattlemen selecting heifers to retain in the herd as replacements might benefit from the findings to help identify which heifers to keep or to cull.

Birth date

The “Effect of Calving Period on Heifer Progeny” study found that

heifers born in the first 21 days of the calving season had an average pregnancy rate of 90% as yearlings,
heifers born in the second 21-day period had an 86% pregnancy rate, and
heifers born in the third 21-day period had a 78% pregnancy rate.

The pregnancy rate for these heifers in their second breeding season was 93%, 90% and 84% respectively based on the heifer’s birth date being in the first, second or third 21-day interval of the calving season. In this study, heifer calves born in the first two 21-day calving intervals are older and more likely to conceive in the first breeding season. They also have an advantage in conceiving as a two-year-old in their second breeding season.

Age of dam

In the “Effect of Dam Age on Offspring Productivity” study, the age of a heifer’s dam when she is born significantly influenced a heifer’s pregnancy rate as a two-year-old during her second breeding season. Heifers born to first-calf-heifers only had a 58% pregnancy rate in their second breeding season. Heifers born to cows that already had one or more calves had pregnancy rates of 84% in their second breeding season. There was no statistical difference for the age of dam influence on pregnancy rates for heifers in the first breeding season. This data set includes records from almost 1500 heifers spanning a range of years from 1997 to 2014.

In the “Effect of Dam Age on Offspring Productivity” study it is likely that both genetics and environment are impacting the heifer calf and her future productivity. The environmental effect can be divided into the in utero phase and the pre-weaning phase. During pregnancy, younger cows are still growing and need more energy and nutrients. This high nutrition requirement is likely resulting in nutritional imbalances for the in utero developing heifer and impacting that heifer’s subsequent reproductive performance. After calving, young cows are not providing as much milk for the calf, likely impacting the heifer calf’s growth from calving till weaning.

Summary

Heifer calves born early in the calving season and retained as replacements in this herd were more likely to conceive as yearlings and also had an advantage in conceiving as two-year-old heifers.
Heifer calves born to cows that were three-years-old or older, had a significant advantage in conceiving in their second breeding season when compared to heifers born to first-calf-heifers.

For this herd, two of the major indicators of the likelihood of a heifer becoming pregnant as a yearling and also as a two-year-old heifer were the heifers own birth date and the age of her dam when she was born. Producers selecting replacement heifers for development and use in their own herd may benefit from using this information in identifying which heifers to keep or to cull.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Do Your Heifers Make the Grade?

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:31:43 GMT

From health to nutrition to reproductive status, how you manage and monitor replacement heifers now can have a positive outcome on the future success of those females.

Pre-breeding vaccinations, administered at least 30 days prior to breeding, are the first step in setting up heifers for their future role in the cow herd. By immunizing the females against infectious reproductive diseases, you can help minimize embryonic losses later in gestation.

Research from South Dakota State University (SDSU) has demonstrated that developing heifers to between 55% and 65% of their mature body weight before breeding can increase pregnancy success because then more heifers reach puberty and cycle prior to the breeding season. Monitoring weights can help determine the rate of gain needed for the heifers to reach their target weight by breeding time.

A management plan that includes reproductive tract scoring (RTS) further adds to the potential success of replacement heifers. RTS and pelvic measurements, taken four to six weeks prior to breeding to assess puberty, aids in identifying those heifers that are more fertile and will conceive earlier in the first breeding season.

Health

Pre-Breeding Vaccinations

First, replacement heifers should be given pre-breeding vaccinations at least 30 days prior to breeding to protect them from infectious reproductive diseases, such as leptospirosis, IBR, and BVDV. These conditions can be detrimental to fertility as they contribute to embryonic losses in addition to losses later in gestation. Heifers may need booster doses of these vaccines, so timing should be carefully considered and discussed with a veterinarian. Brucellosis, or “Bangs,” vaccination should also be considered. This vaccine is administered by an accredited veterinarian when the heifer is between 4 and 12 months of age. There is no longer a national or state requirement for brucellosis vaccination, but vaccinated animals are better able to move between states (as a result of the orange identification “Bangs tag” applied at the time of vaccination) and are protected against the disease should it show up in the region.

Nutrition

Next, heifers need to have good nutritional management in order to reach a target weight by breeding time. Research has shown that developing heifers to 55 – 65% of mature body weight by breeding aids in pregnancy success due to more heifers reaching puberty and cycling prior to breeding season. Development below 55% can lead to less heifers reaching puberty at breeding and thus delayed conceptions. Knowing mature cow weights and current heifer weights will help you determine the required rate of gain needed to attain desired target weight by breeding time.

Reproductive Status

Reproductive Tract Scoring

Heifers must reach puberty by 15 months-of-age if they are to calve by 24 months. Therefore, heifers that reach puberty at an earlier age than their counterparts prior to breeding (due to nutrition, genetics, environment, etc.) are more likely to experience multiple estrous cycles before the breeding season. This can have a positive effect on conception, leading to earlier calving during her first year and also in consecutive years, allowing her to wean more pounds over her lifetime. However, it can be difficult to determine the exact age at puberty without watching them constantly for visual signs of estrus. Reproductive tract scoring (RTS) and pelvic measurements can be assessed 4 – 6 weeks prior to breeding replacement heifers to see if they are reaching puberty and if they should actually be bred or if value can be realized by feeding them in the feedlot.

RTS is a subjective measurement that involves palpation of uterine tone, uterine size and ovarian structures of the reproductive tract to determine sexual maturity of the heifer. A scoring system 1 through 5 is available for determining an RTS of each female based on a combination of the previous palpation measurements, along with ovarian length, height and width. A score of 1 would be immature/prepubertal, 2 or 3 refer to peripubertal, with 4 and 5 indicating pubertal females with presence of dominant ovarian structures. A trained veterinarian can perform RTS in a matter of seconds and this practice could be done at Bangs vaccination time if performed no sooner than 10 – 12 months of age. Females with higher RTS are likely more fertile and will conceive earlier in the 1st breeding season, as well as stay in the herd longer than immature prepubertal females.

Pelvic Measurements

Also, measuring pelvic area is a practice that can be performed in replacement heifers that may be helpful in identifying females that could be prone to future calving difficulty if the pelvic canal is smaller than desired for anticipated calf birth weight. Pelvic area will not likely have an effect on fertility directly; however, it may predict future dystocia events. If dystocia occurs it will decrease pregnancy rates by extending the postpartum period, delaying estrus and reducing conception rates.

Pelvic area is measured using a pelvimeter introduced into the rectum which will measure the height and width of the pelvis at the widest points. These measurements are multiplied together and measures the area in square cm. Average pelvic area for a 600 lb. heifer is 140 cm2 (11.5 cm wide x 12.5 cm high) with the ability to deliver a 67 lb. calf. Pelvic area continues to grow at 0.27 cm2/day until 2 years of age, and then slows through maturity.

In Summary

These are only some of the management tips that can be implemented into heifer development programs to assist producers in raising heifers that will work for them and keep high-quality females entering the cow herd as replacements year after year.

References:

Anderson, K. J., D. G. Lefever, J. S. Brinks, and K.G. Odde. 1991. The use of reproductive tract scoring in beef heifers. Agri-Practice 12(4): 19.
Perry, G. A., and M. F. Smith. 2014. Keys to Successful estrus synchronization and artificial insemination programs. Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle Proceedings; Stillwater, Oklahoma.
Torell, R., G. Veserat, B. Kvasnicka, K. Conley, L. Krysil, and B. Bruce. 2007. Heifer development: the key to a profitable cow herd. University of Nevada, Reno School of Veterinary Medicine.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Simple Math Sets Calves Up for Success

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:31:26 GMT

No cattleman wants to be locked-in to a management regimen. After all, no two cow herds are the same; no two environments are the same.

Sticking to a strict modified-live vaccination program that fits the cattle working schedule is often challenging for both producers and veterinarians. While research has shown that modified-live vaccinations can be very effective in preventing abortions, a one-size-fits-all protocol might not be the best route for effective protection. That’s why developing a fetal protection program in cooperation with your herd veterinarian is key to setting calves up for success right from the start.

As cattlemen prepare for the fall breeding season and work to develop recently weaned spring-born calves, it’s never too early to think about protecting the next calf crop by implementing a strong fetal protection vaccine program.

“It’s important to get that calf going good, and the right health all starts from the beginning,” said Cody Jorgensen, a partner in Jorgensen Land and Cattle near Ideal, South Dakota. “If you aren’t off to a good start, it’s a battle the rest of the way through that calf’s life.”

“What we’re doing by using fetal protection vaccines is that we are effectively protecting the calf prior to birth. If you couple that with a proper nutritional program, we’re setting that calf up for success in being able to reach its full genetic potential, from the time it’s conceived all the way through the production cycle,” says Mark Alley, DVM, Technical Services veterinarian with Zoetis.

While research has shown that a modified-live vaccination program can be highly effective in helping prevent abortions caused by infectious bovine rhinotracheitis (IBR) and persistent infection caused by bovine viral diarrhea (BVD) viruses Types 1 and 2, maintaining a strictly modified-live vaccination program that fits the cattle working schedule can be challenging for veterinarians and producers alike.

A nearly three-year study at Auburn University evaluated the efficacy of a vaccination program where heifers were all vaccinated with two doses of a modified-live reproductive vaccine (BOVI-SHIELD GOLD FP^® 5) prior to breeding.¹ At pregnancy check, the vaccinated heifers were split into two groups — one continued to get BOVI-SHIELD GOLD FP 5 and a second group was given CATTLEMASTER GOLD FP® 5. The study also maintained a control group, which received no vaccinations.

Study results in the control group revealed the severity of the challenge model with 14 of 15 cows either aborting BVD-positive calves or delivering a BVD persistently infected calf. Researchers observed significant (p < 0.0001) protection against both virulent BVD and IBR exposure in the vaccinated groups with both vaccine groups providing similarly high levels of protection.¹

Dr. Alley says it is important for producers and veterinarians to look at the labels to make sure they are selecting vaccines that are effective in protecting against the reproductive forms of these important diseases. This means looking for the following information on the vaccine label:

“FP” in the name of the product, which is a designation that the vaccine provides fetal protection
Indication to prevent or control IBR-related abortions
Indication to prevent or control BVD persistently infected calves

Producers are encouraged to visit with their veterinarian or local Zoetis representative about developing an effective fetal protection program or visit FetalCalfProtection.com for more information.

Do not use in pregnant cows (abortions can result) unless they were vaccinated, according to label directions, with any BOVI-SHIELD GOLD FP or PREGGUARD GOLD FP^® vaccine prebreeding initially and within 12 months thereafter. Do not use in calves nursing pregnant cows unless their dams were vaccinated within the past 12 months as described above. To help ensure safety in pregnant cattle, heifers must receive at least 2 doses of any BOVI-SHIELD GOLD FP or PREGGUARD GOLD FP vaccine with the second dose administered approximately 30 days prebreeding.

Reference:
¹ Walz PH, Givens MD, Rodning SP, et al. Evaluation of reproductive protection against bovine viral diarrhea virus and bovine herpesvirus-1 afforded by annual revaccination with modified-live viral or combination modified-live/killed viral vaccines after primary vaccination with modified-live viral vaccine. Vaccine. 2017;35(7):1046-1054.