Optimizing Facilities for
Transition Cow Success
Ken Nordlund, DVMUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison
DAIReXNET
Dec. 14, 2010
Nordlund
McGuirk
Oetzel
Cook
Food Animal Production Medicine Group
Dopfer
Topics
What is Transition Cow Index (TCI®)?
Surveys of industry management practices
– Wisconsin freestall
– Western open lot
Application to new barn construction
What is TCI®?
Acronym for Transition Cow Index®
System of evaluating transition cow management programs
Basis is that sick fresh cows produce less milk
Actual milk yield on 1st test date is compared to expectations
Milk yield and various fresh cow diseases
▬ Healthy X Digestive disorder
■ Ketosis ▲Displaced abomasum
Edwards & Tozer. 2004. JDS 87:524-531
Onset of common dairy cow diseases
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Milk fever Retainedplacenta
Metritis Off feed LDA Ketosis Clinicalmastitis
Enteritis
Day
s in
milk
Median DIM at diagnosis
Median DIM at 1st Test
Modified from Østergaard & Gröhn. 1999. JDS 82:1188
Transition Cow Index®
AgSource DHIA data from half-million cows for 2 yrs
Matched 4,000 herds with Posilac purchase records
Used “historical” data in mixed model to predict expected 1st test milk between 5-40 DIM
TCI = difference between expected and actual 1st test milk yield
Two forms
– TCI-D® : units are lbs of daily milk on 1st test date
– TCI® : units are lbs of 1st test 305-day projected milk
Transition Cow Index® (TCI®) or (TCI-D®)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Breed
PosilacMilking
frequencyCalving month
Days
dry
Prior SCC
Etc.Abort?
Prior milk
- TCI
+ TCI
- TCI-D
+ TCI-D
Prior
lactation
length
Nordlund, Proc AABP, 2006
Owned by WARF, the technology transfer unit of the University of Wisconsin
Licensed to AgSource, the Wisconsin-based DHIA service since 2006– Can access through DairyOne in New York
and AgSource services in the Southwest US
Licensed to Valacta in Quebec in 2010 TCI-D® has been licensed for use across
the US and may become more available
Availability of TCI®?
What is the association of TCI®
with subsequent survival and milk
yield?
-20,000 -10,000 0 10,000 20,000
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
Association of TCI with survival to next lactationP
rob
abil
ity
Records of 194,402 cows in
4,025 herds
TCI
20,000 lbs TCI associated with 48% increased survival rate, or 2.4% per 1,000 lbs
TCI® and subsequent milk yield
What is the association of TCI with subsequent milk production?
Cumulative milk is “actual” milk produced before subsequent dry-off or culling, not standardized to 305 days
Data from 193,235 cows in 4,011 herds
TCI® and subsequent milk yield
Regression equation
Cumulative milk = 23,484 + (1.31 x TCI)
Each lb TCI associated with 1.3 lbs milk in the lactation
Economics of 1,000 lb TCI®
Reduced turnover rate of 2.5%– $1500 Replacement - $500 Cull = $1,000– 2.5% x $1,000 = $25 per cow per year
Increased milk yield of 1,300 lbs– 1,300 lbs milk = $97 income over feed cost
(IOFC) at $0.15/lb milk and IOFC 50% of gross
Sum = $122 IOFC per cow per year Does not include any estimate of reproductive benefits or reduced disease treatment costs
Topics What is TCI®?
Surveys of industry management practices
– Wisconsin freestall
– Western open lot
Application to new barn construction
Using TCI® in field studies
TCI is not dependent upon disease event records
Can be calculated for any herd with archived DHIA records
Reflects preventive programs, detection & treatment programs, and early lactation nutrition
Allows herd transition management to be characterized in an objective manner if daily milk weights are accurate
Wisconsin Freestall Survey
Transition mgt practices of 50 larger Wisconsin freestall herds using AgSource DHI testing services
Stratified random selection representing range in annual herd avg TCI score from -4,000 to +2,500 lb
Herd average size ~600 cows (range 300 – 1,600)
Financial support from Pfizer Animal Health
Distribution of Herd Average TCI Values
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%-4
,500
-4,0
00
-3,5
00
-3,0
00
-2,5
00
-2,0
00
-1,5
00
-1,0
00 -500
0
500
1,00
0
1,50
0
2,00
0
2,50
0
3,00
0
3,50
0
4,00
0
4,50
0
TCI, lbs 305-day projected milk
% o
f Her
ds
4,011 Herds
Freestall Risk Factors Evaluated
Routine management practices – Posilac, dry rx, Orbeseal, vaccines, milking freq, etc
Cow-level data – BCS, hygiene, avoidance in prefresh and postfresh pens
Nutritional data – prefresh and postfresh rations
Pen move policy and stocking density Housing information – freestalls, pens,
feedbunks Herdsman interview – screening, dx and rx
protocols
Wisconsin Freestall Study
Significant risk factors for herd average TCI, p<0.05
Bunkspace, prefresh pen and fresh pen Freestall base (sand vs mattress) Freestall size, area Move to calving pen (≤2 days vs 3+ days) Screening method (4 categories)
Prefresh bunk space was the single most significant risk factor for TCI
Stall Factors
Stall surface (ls means)Mattress barns (-) 675 lbs TCISand barns (+) 560 lbs TCI
Dimensions (width x length including available forward lunge)
Movement into calving pens 3-10 days prior to due date associated with lower TCI than movement ≤2 days
Maternity or calving pens
How about the rations?
Close-up Ration NDF%
y = -3.605x - 611.8
R2 = 6E-05
-5000
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
25 30 35 40 45 50
P-NDF
He
rd A
vg T
CI
TCI_120
Linear (TCI_120)
Western Open Lot Survey
Convenience sample of 25 herds in Arizona, California, Idaho, & New Mexico in 2008
Average herd size 4,000 cows (range 2,000-11,000)
Financial support from Pfizer Animal Health
Herd Average TCI-D
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
HerdTC
I-D
, lb
s at
1st
Tes
t
Distribution of Herd Average TCI-D Scores
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%-3
0-2
8-2
6-2
4-2
2-2
0-1
8-1
6-1
4-1
2-1
0 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 810 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
TCI-D, lbs first test
% o
f Her
ds
4,011 Herds
Open Lot Risk Factors Evaluated
Routine management practices – Posilac use, dry rx, Orbeseal, milking freq
Prefresh cow data – BCS, locomotion scores
Pen move policy and headlock stocking density
Housing information – feedbunks, shade, bedding under shades, cooling, water access space, distance to parlor
Western Open Lot Study
Significant risk factors for herd average TCI, p<0.05
Bunkspace, prefresh pen and fresh pen Locomotion score, %3&4 on 4-pt scale Body condition score outliers, % ≤2.5 & ≥4 Move to calving pen (≤2 days vs 3+ days) Shade (yes,no)
Transition pen bunk space was again the single most important risk factor for TCI
Prevalence of lame cows was negatively associated with herd TCI average
Depth of bedding below shade had negative association with prevalence of lameness
Topics What is TCI®?
Surveys of industry management practices
– Wisconsin freestall
– Western open lot
Application to new barn construction
http://thedairylandinitiative.vetmed.wisc.edu/
How much bunk space?
Primary & secondary peaksin feed bunk utilization
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
110
:52
11:5
2
12:5
2
13:5
2
14:5
2
15:5
2
16:5
2
17:5
2
18:5
2
19:5
2
20:5
2
21:5
2
22:5
2
23:5
2
0:52
1:52
2:52
3:52
4:52
5:52
6:52
7:52
8:52
9:52
10:5
2
11:5
2
12:5
2
13:5
2
14:5
2
15:5
2
Time
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f fe
ed
bu
nk
sp
ac
es
fill
ed
13:14 push up
14:12 milking
16:02 all back
16:47 push up
17:44 push up
18:19 push up
21:50 milking
22:12 push up
23:03 all back
0:07 push up
4:47 push up
6:20 milking
6:50 push up
7:46 all back
8:20 feed delivery
9:44 push up
Primary Peak
Secondary Peak
Secondary Peak
Mentink & Cook, JDS, 2006
Feeding space video study
Maximum fill rate of 24-inch headlocks is ~80%
Independent of stocking pressure in pen Minimal space = 30 inches per cow
(30 = 24 inches ÷ 0.80) Standard 2-row pen = 24 inches per cow Standard 3-row pen = 16 inches per cow Overstocking of stalls reduces bunk space
further
30” headlocks, one per cow
Sand or other deeply bedded surface
Effect of stall base on lameness prevalence
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Lame 1 Lame 2
Mat
Mattress
Sand
Lam
enes
s pr
eval
ence
, %
of
herd
Cook, JAVMA, 2002
Summer Winter
Sand / mattress study design Six sand barns (three 4-row, three 6-row) Six mattress barns (three 4-row, three 6-row) No expansion within past 2 years
Cook, et al., JDS, 2004
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
1 2 3 1 2 3
MAT SAND
Locomotion Score (1-3)
Dai
ly A
ctiv
ity
(Ho
urs
per
day
)
Lying time Time standing in alley (including drinking) Time Up Feeding Time Up Milking Standing in Stall
Daily Time Budgets and Stall Base
– Locomotion Score Interaction
Cook, et al., JDS, 2004SandMattress
66”
45”
Freestall sizeToo small for modern mature Holstein cows! Dimensions originated in the 70’s (MWPS-5)
Cows have gotten bigger (Hansen, JDS, 2000)
Understanding of ergonomics has improved
Prefresh stalls - mature cow groups = 52” W & 9-10’ LMixed groups with heifers = 48-49” wide
Social turmoil following regroupingKondo & Hurnik, (1990) Appl. An. Behav. Sci 27:287-297
Social turmoil profile of a pen
Weekly entries into pen
Daily entries into pen
etc….
One-time entry into pen
-11 to -20 days-20 to -30 days -0 to -10 days
Traditional close-up pen - Constant social turmoil with frequent entries and continual exits for 20+ days
Stable social groups before calving - Establish social order once, remain intact until calving
For ~55-day dry period, establish series of 5 pens each with cohorts expected to calve within a 10-day window
Open Lots
Cows calve in the last pen of the series where they can be observed
Labor is reduced because “close up” cows do not need to be sorted out of a big “far dry” pen
As the calving pen empties, each subsequent cohort is moved in series toward the calving area
In housed cows, the practices diverge around where calving occurs
Close-up / Calving Pens: Stable social groups of ~10 move onto pack ~21 days before due date. The cows deliver on the pack.
Stable social groups of ~25 assembled at dry off and remain intact until each individual cow begins labor
2-row head-to-tail prefresh pen so that any cow beginning labor can be seen from the feed alley
Optimal transition barns
Bunk space for all cows to eat simultaneously Minimize lameness with deep, soft bedded
surfaces Sand-based freestalls Deep bedded packs
If freestalls, amply sized for mature cows Stabilize social groupings Provide these conditions even during surges in
calvings
Sizing the pens
Traditional method of pen sizing
• Example: 1,600 cow herd
• How many calvings per week?• 7 days in a week divided by 365 days equals
1.9%
• 1.9% of 1,600 cows equals 31 cows per week
• How long is close-up period? 3 weeks!• 3 wk x 31 cows/wk = 93 stalls
Calvings per Week1,600 cow dairy herd
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
4512
/10/
2005
12/2
4/20
05
1/7/
2006
1/21
/200
6
2/4/
2006
2/18
/200
6
3/4/
2006
3/18
/200
6
4/1/
2006
4/15
/200
6
4/29
/200
6
5/13
/200
6
5/27
/200
6
6/10
/200
6
6/24
/200
6
7/8/
2006
7/22
/200
6
8/5/
2006
8/19
/200
6
9/2/
2006
9/16
/200
6
9/30
/200
6
10/1
4/20
06
10/2
8/20
06
11/1
1/20
06
11/2
5/20
06
No
. o
f co
ws
Avg = 28 per week Range = 15 to 40 (54%-143% of avg)Guideline: “Overbuild” for surges3-wk period:130-140% of wk avg8-wk period: 120% of wk avg
Basic Point
These recommendations apply to the prefresh and postfresh periods, not the entire herd
Each transition stall gets used for a period of 3-7 weeks
Each transition stall is a risk factor for not one, but 7-15 cows per year!
July 2009 – “Okay, let’s build one!”
+530 +1,988
Response of >1,400 lbs TCI®
Each 1,000 lbs TCI® associated with ~$122 income over feed cost Expected benefit $170 IOFC per cow per yr
Costs of “excess & oversized” stalls?
Assumptions: 1,000 cows = 1,050 calvings per year 1,050 / yr ÷ 52 wks = 20 calvings per wk Average freestall = $2,500 per stall Wider, longer stalls = $2,800 per stall “Overbuild” capacity for close-up period of
3 wks at 140% of avg “Overbuild” capacity of fresh pen for 3 wks
at 130% of avg
Costs – 1,000 cow example
Traditional TCI-friendly
Lactation pens Same Same
Far dry pens Same Same
Close up (3 wk) 60 stalls 84 stalls
Fresh (3 wk) 60 stalls 78 stallsAdditional stalls 42 stalls per 1000 cows
Avg cost / stall $2,500 $2,800
Total cost $150,000 $218,400
Added cost $68,400 per 1,000 cows
Costs – 1,000 cow example
Traditional TCI-friendlyAdditional stalls 42 stalls per 1000 cows
Avg cost / stall $2,500 $2,800
Total cost $150,000 $218,400
Added cost $68,400 per 1,000 cows
Amortize $68,400 over 5 yr at 10% interest Annual payment = $26,400 Cow-friendly barn costs an additional
$26,400 more per year for 5 years
Costs Benefits– 1,000 cow example
Added annual payment = ($26,400) yr 5 yr
$26/400 ÷ 1000 cows = ($26) per cow per yr
Herd response suggests >1,400 lb TCI improvement = $170 IOFC per cow per yr
$170 - $26 = $145 per cow per year
(not counting ↓drugs, labor, or barn life>5 yrs)
http://thedairylandinitiative.vetmed.wisc.edu/
http://thedairylandinitiative.vetmed.wisc.edu/
Are you soon
done?
Summary
TCI provides an objective measure of herd-level transition management and fresh cow health
Field surveys using TCI suggest that bunk space, minimizing lameness via better stalls and surfaces, and stabilizing social groups are key management factors
Impact of improved TCI on subsequent survival and milk yield will pay for high quality transition cow housing