THIS MONTH S ARTICLE:

ARIZONA AND NEW MEXICO DAIRY NEWSLETTER COOPERATIVE EXTENSION The University of Arizona New Mexico State University May 2009 THIS MONTH S ARTICLE: An Update on Management Programs for Holstein Calves G. C. Duff, K. J. Dick, S. W. Limesand, S. R. Sanders, and S. P. Cuneo Department of Animal Sciences, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona Corresponding author: gduff@ag.arizona.edu SAVE THE DATE Arizona Dairy Production Conference Hilton Garden Inn Phoenix, AZ October 15, 2009

The 8 th Annual Arizona Dairy Production Conference October 15, 2009 Hilton Garden Inn Phoenix Airport This is a one day conference that provides technical information to dairy producers and allied industry in Arizona. With 139 licensed dairies and 1331 cows per dairy (or 173,000 total head) the State of Arizona ranks 2 nd in the nation for herd size and 3 rd in the nation for pounds of milk produced per cow with 22,855 milk pounds per cow. The networking opportunities are great as many of the Dairy Producers attend this event. All sponsors will be recognized at the registration table and inside the conference room. Other options for each level are detailed on the enclosed sponsor form. If you wish to be a sponsor please complete the form and send it along with your payment. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Julie at 520-626-1754 or Stefanic@ag.arizona.edu.

Sponsorship Options Platinum Sponsorship Level........................................... $2,000 Display table outside of seminar room Sponsor in official conference program Two complimentary conference registrations Signage at conference listing your sponsorship Gold Sponsorship Level............................................... $1,000 Sponsor in official conference program One complimentary conference registration Signage at conference listing your sponsorship Silver Sponsorship Level............................................... $500 Sponsor in official conference program Signage at conference listing your sponsorship ------------------------------------------ Name: 8 th Annual Dairy Production Conference Thursday, October 15, 2009 (Note: Change of Date) Hilton Garden Inn Phoenix Airport 3422 E Elwood Phoenix, Arizona Organization: Address: City, State, ZIP: Phone: Sponsorship Amount: Fax: Email Address: If you choose the PLATINUM sponsorship level, please let us know if you would like to put up a display: Yes, I will need space for a display No, I am not going to put up a display. Make check payable to: University of Arizona Foundation Please mail check to: The University of Arizona Campus Agricultural Center Department of Animal Sciences 4101 N. Campbell Ave. Tucson, AZ 85719 Attention: Julie Stefanic 520-626-1754 stefanic@ag.arizona.edu

8 th Annual Arizona Dairy Production Conference October 15, 2009 Registration Form REGISTRATION FEE DOES NOT APPLY TO PRODUCERS Allied Industry Registration Fee: $25.00 X = $ # people Additional Proceedings: $10.00 X = $ # Total amount enclosed or charged to credit card: $ Name Organization Address City, State, ZIP Phone FAX Email If paying by credit card (Please note only Visa or Mastercard can be accepted) Mastercard or Visa Credit Card Number Expiration Date 3- or 4-digit security code No part of the registration fee is considered a tax deductible donation. Send registration form and fees to: The University of Arizona Attn: Julie Stefanic Department of Animal Sciences Shantz Building - PO Box 210038 Tucson, AZ 85721 For addidtional information call 520-626-1754 or email stefanic@ag.arizona.edu

An Update on Management Programs for Holstein Calves G. C. Duff, K. J. Dick, S. W. Limesand, S. R. Sanders, and S. P. Cuneo Department of Animal Sciences, The University of Arizona, Tucson Corresponding author: gduff@ag.arizona.edu SUMMARY All colostrum is not created equal. Direct fed microbials can alter performance of calves, particularly after weaning, and alters digestive tract morphology. Pasteurization management, weaning programs and growing diets deserves attention. INTRODUCTION Holstein calves (both bulls and heifers) are of great financial importance to both dairies and feedyards in the desert southwest. For steers, their availability and uniformity and overall production have out weighed the potential deficits in carcass characteristics (smaller and elongated ribeye area, increase kidney, pelvic and heart fat, etc.) and increased maintenance costs. In Arizona alone, an estimated 300,000 Holstein steers are raised in beef production facilities. At the current price of approximately $0.80/lb, the live value of the animals is well over $300,000,000. Nutrition and management during the first few weeks of life has long-term impacts on animal productivity (Van Amburgh 2003; 2008). In addition to general performance of the animals, health of the milk-fed calf remains a primary road block to profitability. In 2006, overall death losses of heifers born in 2006 and alive 48 h were reported to be 7.8% (USDA APHIS, 2007). Although data are not available for Holstein bull calves, death losses have been reported to range from 7.7% for bull calves reared for beef to as high as 26.1% in a bull beef ranch in California (Berge et al., 2009). Scours, diarrhea, or other digestive problems caused 56.5% of the reported deaths followed by respiratory 22.5% in unweaned heifers (USDA- APHIS, 2007). Morbidity of dairy calves is less available. Morbidity of dairy calves encompasses several mechanisms. Diarrhea can be a problem at times and if left unchecked, the animals succumb to dehydration and death. In addition, respiratory disease complex may be a problem. Respiratory disease is a viral/bacterial disease. However; Rivera et al. (2003) pointed out that exacerbating factors, such as degree of stress, previous plane of nutrition, genetic, and previous health history, interact with exposure to viral and bacterial agents in beef cattle. The long-term consequences of morbidity include lighter final body weight and decreased average daily gain, lighter carcasses, lesser percentage of carcasses grading USDA Choice or better compared with animals never treated for respiratory disease. Several nutrition and management considerations may influence morbidity and mortality of Holstein calves. Therefore, improving performance of Holstein calves will have a tremendous impact on the economy in Arizona. Colostrum PRE-WEANING MANAGEMENT At the 23 rd Annual Southwest Nutrition and Management Conference, Van Amburgh pointed out the importance of colostrum management and plasma Ig status on calf survivability and 32

growth. Colostrum status will also be addressed during this conference. Van Amburgh (2008) discussed colostrum management and suggested that all colostrum in not created equal. Preliminary evidence from our research program confirms this observation. Dairy producers have done an excellent job at providing colostrum to all newborn calves, however, anecdotal information suggests that the best quality colostrum is fed to heifer calves. During the fall 2007, we secured Holstein bull calves from two separate sources (Table 1). Although both serum IgG concentrations (measured by turbidimetric immunoassay; QTII; Midland Bioproducts Corporation, Midland, IA) and protein (measured by refractometer) suggested successful passive transfer (Quigley, 2001) for both sources; mortality was higher for Dairy B than for Dairy A (Table 1). Post-mortem evaluation of calves was inconclusive. Results from a clinical trial utilizing 90, 1-d-old calves on each of 3 commercial calf ranches reported that colostrum supplementation during the first 2 wk of life was been successful in reducing diarrhea (Berge et al., 2009). In addition, 28-d average daily gain was significantly increased in colostrum supplemented calves vs. the unsupplemented control group. These authors suggested that colostrum products may adequately address the potential problem of colostrum-deprived calves and minimize prophylactic and therapeutic use of antibiotics. Table 1. An evaluation of mortality at the U of A Calf Research facility during the fall 2007 Source Item a Dairy A Dairy B SE P < Serum IgG, mg/dl 2,075 2,002 112 0.65 Serum protein, g/dl 5.3 5.0 0.06 0.01 Death loss b 6.7 63.0 a Serum IgG measured with turbidimetric analysis using QTII (Midland Bioproducts, Corporation; Boone, IA). Serum protein measured with a refractometer. b Chi Square analysis P < 0.01. Pasteurization of Waste Milk With high milk replacer costs, commercial dairies and calf ranches have renewed interest in using waste milk for calf production. Godden et al. (2005) reported higher growth rate and lower morbidity and mortality rates for calves fed pasteurized nonsaleable milk compared to milk replacer. These authors suggested that part of the performance advantage may have been related to crude protein and crude fat concentrations of the two products. The nonsaleable milk averaged 25.6% crude protein and 29.6% crude fat whereas the milk replacer was a 20:20. Factors that should be further evaluated include efficiency of pasteurization in destroying pathogens and/or antibiotic resistance of pathogens in the animal as well as effects of antibiotics on beneficial gut microflora. Ruzante et al. (2008) reported results from the Central Valley of California with a 3.5-, 3-, 4.7-, and 2.6-log reduction in the number of total bacteria in their waste milk. These authors suggested that a lack of uniformity and adequate controls of pasteurization processes could allow survival of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (MAP) or other pathogens. They further suggested that the calf raising facilities could benefit from stricter training and standard operating procedures. 33

Direct-Fed Microbials Bacterial direct-fed microbials (DFM) fed to cattle have been shown to have many potential benefits to the animal, as well as the producer. Supplementation with DFM has been reported to increase ADG in beef steers (Ware et al., 1988; Galyean et al., 2000; Elam et al., 2003), improve feed efficiency (Galyean et al., 2000; Elam et al., 2003; Vasconceles et al., 2008), and increase hot carcass weight (Galyean et al., 2000; Huck et al, 2000). In preruminant calves, DFM have decreased the incidence of diarrhea (Bechman et al., 1977; Maeng et al., 1987; Fox, 1988; Abu- Tarboush et al., 1996) and have also decreased morbidity. In addition, L. acidophilus has been shown to reduce the prevalence of E. coli O157:H7, decreased the thickness of lamina propria (Elam et al, 2003), as well as protecting the animal s immune system from other pathogens (Fuller, 1977; Gilliland and Speck, 1977). A combination of lactate-utilizing and lactateproducing bacteria can decrease the incidence of ruminal acidosis by altering proportions of VFA (Kim et al., 2000; Beauchemin et al., 2003) and blood metabolites (Ghorbani et al., 2002). Energy utilization may be more efficient due to the modification of VFA proportions (Beauchemin et al., 2003; Elam et al., 2003). Direct-fed microbials have also been shown to be effective in dairy cows by increasing milk yield (Jaquette et al., 1988; Ware et al., 1988a; Gomez-Basauri et al., 2001). Few studies have evaluated effects of DFM on calf performance and digested tract morphology. We conducted an experiment with the objectives of evaluating the effects of a DFM on performance, and ruminal and intestinal morphology of neonatal/transition Holstein bull calves. Overall performance data are presented in Table 2. As designed, no differences (P < 0.81) were detected for beginning BW. Likewise, no differences between treatments were detected for BW at weaning (P = 0.47) or final BW (P = 0.81). Furthermore, no differences between treatments were detected for ADG for calves at weaning (P = 0.37) or for the 2-week post weaning period (P = 0.45). Dry matter intake was not altered by treatment for calves at weaning (P = 0.30), as well as during the 2-week post weaning period (P = 0.37). Feed efficiency (F:G) was not affected by treatment for calves through weaning (P = 0.56) or the post weaning period (P = 0.47). Performance variables were not affected when the DFM was supplemented to the calf diets at weaning or post-weaning. This could be due to the fact that the calves were healthy at the start of the trial and remained healthy throughout the study. As mentioned previously, research has shown that supplementing DFM in calves is beneficial when calves are experiencing health problems. The calves in this trial originated from a single source and were housed on soil that had not been inhabited by cattle in the past. These two factors alone may have prevented illness altogether. There was no difference in BW between treatments during the weaning and post-weaning periods. Likewise, average daily gain was not different between treatments in the present study and this was similar to observations seen in studies performed by Morrill et al., 1977; Ellinger et al., 1980; and Abu-Tarboush et al., 1996. These authors reported no improvement in daily gain as a result of supplementing with lactobacilli. Conversely, a study completed by Beeman (1985) resulted in greater gains by Holstein calves supplemented with lactobacilli compared with control calves. O Brien et al. (2003) reported similar results with Holstein bull calves fed a novel DFM having significantly greater ADG for the first 6 weeks of the study compared to control calves that were not supplemented with DFM. In addition, DMI and feed efficiency were not different between treatment groups in the present study. Cruywagen et al. (1996) reported parallel results observing no difference in DMI or feed efficiency in dairy-type calves fed L. acidophilus in the milk replacer. Improvements in performance may not be as advantageous to neo-natal/transition dairy calves as establishing and 34

maintaining normal intestinal microorganisms. Performance variables may or may not be important during the first 3 weeks of the preruminant s life when enteric disease is most prevalent (Beauchemin et al., 2006). In support, Krehbiel et al. (2003) stated that decreasing the incidence or severity of diarrhea is a most likely a more important response. Rumen papillae height (Table 3) did not differ among treatments in calves at weaning (P = 0.34) or in calves during the post weaning period (P = 0.44). Average papillae width did not differ between treatments in calves at weaning (P = 0.94), however papillae were wider for DFM treated calves after the post weaning period (P < 0.01). The density of ruminal papillae was less in the DFM treated calves post-weaning (P < 0.03), although there was no difference in DFM calves at weaning (P = 0.92) compared to control animals. Ruminal papillae are extremely important in nutrient absorption. Prior to transitioning from a pre-ruminant to a ruminant, growth and development of the ruminal absorptive surface area (papillae), is necessary to enable absorption and utilization of microbial digestion end products, specifically rumen VFA (Warner et al., 1956). In the present study, DFM treatment did not alter ruminal papillae height or width at weaning. However, calves treated with DFM had wider ruminal papillae 2 weeks post-weaning compared to control calves. Essentially, these results suggest that DFM treated calves may have had more nutrient absorptive area than the control animals. Rumen absorptive surface area increases as papillae length and papillae width increase (Lemeister and Heinrichs, 2004). Furthermore, DFM treated calves had less papillae density than control calves during the post-weaning period. Lane and Jesse (1997) observed similar results with lambs infused with VFA. Lambs infused with VFA tended to have longer papillae and less papillae density than the lambs infused with saline, indicating nutrients enhance rumen absorption. The control group had greater papillae density and thinner papillae post-weaning which possibly results in less nutrient absorptive surface area. Papillae growth in DFM treated calves in the present study could be related to increased VFA, as VFA are a byproduct of microbial fermentation. In a study by Tamate et al. (1962), rumen papillary growth was stimulated in milk-fed calves receiving either propionate or butyrate directly into the rumen. These authors go on to mention that butyrate and, to a lesser extent, propionate are used as energy sources by the rumen epithelium and subsequently have the greatest influence on epithelial development. In support, presence and absorption of VFA is indicated to stimulate rumen epithelial metabolism and may be key initiating rumen epithelial development (Baldwin and McLeod, 2000). In the present study, papillary growth results were observed in the postweaning period because at this point the rumen is much more developed than in the milkfeeding stage. In addition, the fact that no difference was observed in papillary growth at weaning is most likely due to the product exerting its effects in the hindgut during the milk fed period because the esophageal groove would be functional at this point. Solid feed intake stimulates rumen microbial proliferation and production of microbial end products, VFA, which have been shown to initiate rumen development (Heinrichs, 2005). In support, in the preweaned dairy calf, solid food intake, especially concentrate of high carbohydrate diets, stimulates rumen microbial proliferation and VFA production, subsequently initiating rumen development (Harrison et al., 1960). In a recent study by Lehloenya et al. (2008), Propionibacteria strain P169 tended to reduce acetate, increased propionate and tended to decrease the acetate:propionate ratio in ruminally and duodenally cannulated Angus X Hereford steers compared to control steers. In reference to the present study, additional microbes in the rumen from the supplemented DFM should essentially produce more VFA with more propionate thus initiating rumen development. 35

In the duodenum, there were no significant differences between treatments for any of the morphometric variables examined at weaning or post-weaning (Table 3). There has not been much research conducted in this area, but it may be concluded that since the duodenum is a short section of the small intestine, rate of passage may be faster, therefore the supplement passed straight through the duodenum without having any effect. In addition, the duodenum function is mostly secretions whereas jejunum and ileum are more absorption. In the ileum, total height, villus height, and crypt depth was greater for DFM treated calves at weaning compared to the control group (Table 3). No differences between treatments were noted for the post-weaning period. As previously mentioned, the reverse effect occurred in the rumen. Post-weaning effects are observed in the rumen because the intake of solid feed initiates rumen development, therefore the DFM exerts its effects on the rumen at this point in development. Similar to the papillary growth in the present study, taller villi may indicate an increased absorptive area for improved nutrient uptake. The increased crypt depth in treated animals at weaning may be resultant of an increased turnover of enterocytes in the small intestine. Enterocytes turn over in the gastrointestinal canal by migrating from their mitosis in the crypts of Lieberkuhn to their extrusion at the tips of the villi and destruction in the lumen (Savage, 1986). Furthermore, reduction in intestinal crypt cell production can be attributed to lack of luminal nutrition or altered intestinal workload (McCullough et al., 1998). The hypothesis in the present study was that DFM treated calves would have improved performance variables and that digestive tract morphology of treated calves would also be improved. Although performance was not significantly different, there was definitely considerable improvement in ruminal and ileal morphology, indicative of a possible improvement in nutrient absorption. Dietary direct-fed microbial supplementation had no statistically significant effect on production variables of uncompromised calves (body weight, average daily gain, feed intake, and feed efficiency); albeit the greatest numerical results happened in post-weaning. It did, however, have positive effects on digestive tract morphology. Direct-fed microbial supplementation increased the size of ruminal papillae, as well as increasing the size of ileal villi. These results indicate that direct-fed microbials may increase the nutrient absorptive surface area of the rumen and small intestine, resulting in a healthier digestive tract. If this is the case, there is a possibility that microbial supplementation can be used by calf producers to improve and/or maintain the health of calves immediately after birth, as well as aiding in the transition stage from the milk-feeding period to the post-weaning period. Little research has been conducted in this particular field of work, therefore many questions remain and further studies are required in order to gain a better understanding of the effects of direct-fed microbial on neo-natal/transition dairy calves. Future studies might include using a larger number of animals in order to evaluate animal performance effectively. Future researchers may also want to determine the incidence of enteric pathogens such as E. coli and Salmonella in calves treated with DFM. Proliferation of ruminal papillae and growth rate of papillae may also be topics of future studies involving DFM supplemented calves. 36

Table 2. Effects of direct-fed microbials on performance by Holstein bull calves before weaning and 2 wk postweaning Treatments Item Control DFM a SE P < Phase 1 Initial BW, lb 94 93 2.4 0.72 Weaning BW, lb 156 153 2.9 0.98 Day 0 to weaning ADG, lb 1.25 1.21 0.04 0.38 Daily DMI, lb/d 2.30 2.26 0.03 0.38 G:F 0.54 0.54 0.01 0.58 Phase 2 Weaning BW, lb 156 155 4.17 0.89 Final BW, lb 183 185 5.55 0.81 ADG, lb 2.04 2.24 0.31 0.66 DMI, lb 4.75 4.68 0.09 0.67 G:F 0.43 0.49 0.07 0.57 a 5 x 10 8 of Bovamine supplemented daily b Weaning refers to calves supplemented only through milk feeding. c Post-weaning refers to calves supplemented though weaning plus an additional 14 days of grain feeding. 37

Table 3. Effects of direct-fed microbials on the digestive tract morphology of Holstein bull calves Treatments Variable/period a Control DFM b SE P-value Ruminal Papillae height, μm Weaning 971.28 867.25 84.16 0.34 Post-weaning 1064.81 1128.72 62.76 0.44 Average papillae width, μm Weaning 129.49 128.42 11.59 0.94 Post-weaning 120.43 137.92 5.29 <0.01 Density of papillae, no./mm Weaning 4.1 4.2 0.00007 0.92 Post-weaning 3.1 2.4 0.00128 0.03 Duodenum Total height (villus + crypt), μm Weaning 1047.53 927.07 101.18 0.40 Post-weaning 786.25 818.58 29.77 0.43 Villus height, μm Weaning 455.41 489.85 30.00 0.40 Post-weaning 425.30 440.52 19.95 0.56 Crypt depth, μm Weaning 442.98 389.17 29.68 0.18 Post-weaning 361.74 378.66 16.68 0.43 38

Average villus width, μm Weaning 145.45 130.64 12.76 0.41 Post-weaning 123.07 129.34 6.48 0.47 Ileum Total height (villus + crypt), μm Weaning 756.64 891.37 34.41 <0.01 Post-weaning 940.75 899.62 34.47 0.39 Villus height, μm Weaning 462.25 543.17 20.99 <0.01 Post-weaning 554.34 503.58 20.57 0.07 Crypt depth, μm Weaning 295.09 348.65 17.78 0.03 Post-weaning 387.04 397.04 18.40 0.69 Average villus width, μm Weaning 112.22 119.65 5.05 0.29 Post-weaning 122.50 118.07 5.04 0.51 a Weaning refers to calves supplemented only through milk feeding. Post-weaning refers to calves supplemented though weaning plus an additional 14 days of grain feeding. b 5 x 10 8 of Bovamine supplemented daily Special Dietary Considerations One common practice for producers to decrease both diarrhea and respiratory disease is use of antibiotics in milk replacer. A total of 55.7% of producers include antibiotics in milk replacer with oxytetracycline and neomycin used most often. Other research that has shown promise have been inclusion of allicin (thio-2-propene-1 sulinic acid S-allyl ester) a component of garlic (Donovan et al., 2002). The aforementioned authors fed milk replacers containing antibiotics or a blend of fructooligosaccharides, allicin and gut-active microbes from birth to 5 weeks of age. Results suggested that a combination of compounds resulted in similar calf performance as milk replacers containing oxytetracycline and neomycin. Likewise, Heinrichs et al. (2003) reported that mannan oligosaccharide can replace antibiotics in milk replacer. Addition of mannan oligosaccharide also improved feed intake compared to antibiotic-fed calves, but this difference did not result in overall growth differences. 39

Weaning The average age heifer calves are weaned was 8.2 weeks (USDA-APHIS, 2007) and 64% of dairies reporting to the USDA-APHIS weaning heifers between 6 and 8 wks of age. In addition, it has generally been recommended that calves be weaned when they are consistently consuming 700 to 900 g/d of starter (Maas and Robinson, 2007). Quigley (1996) evaluated weaning methods for Jersey calves and reported that intake of milk replacer and feed costs were greater when calves were weaned according to intake of starter (1 lb/day for 2 consecutive days). Other methods of weaning have been according to body weight or age (Quigley, 1996). With increased costs of production, calf ranches may be weaning calves earlier and the impact of such practices on overall feedlot performance deserves attention. POST-WEANING MANAGEMENT Feeding Holstein steers from weaning to 125 kg (275 lbs) Limited research is available evaluating diets for Holstein steers from weaning through 125 kg. Holstein steers are weaned on high concentrate diets; however, growing diets should be higher in fiber and lower in protein than calf starter diets (Maas and Robinson, 2007). For weaned calves, diets should be 18% CP (63 g CP/mcal ME) up to 8 wk old and 15 to 16% CP (52 to 56 g CP/mcal ME) for calves form 8 to 12 wk old (Hill et al., 2008). In addition, protein sources used during this critical time period should be plant based. Holstein steers may not utilize nonprotein nitrogen sources until later in the finishing period (Duff and McMurphy, 2007). REFERENCES Abu-Tarboush, H. M., M. Y. Al-Saiady, and A. H. Keir El-Din. 1996. Evaluation of diet containing lactobacilli on performance, fecal coliform, and lactobacilli of young dairy calves. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 57:39 49. Baldwin, R. L., VI, and K. R. McLeod. 2000. Effects of diet forage:concentrate ratio and metabolizable energy intake on isolated rumen epithelial cell metabolism in vitro. J. Anim. Sci. 78:771-783. Beauchemin, K. A., C. R. Krehbiel, and C. J. Newbold. 2006. Enzymes, Bacterial Direct-Fed Microbials and Yeast: Principles for Use in Ruminant Nutrition. Pages 251-284 in R. Mosenthin, R. Zentek, and P Zebrowska (Eds.) Biology of Nutrition in Growing Animals. Elsevier. Beauchemin, K. A., W. Z. Yang, D. P. Morgavi, G. R. Ghorbani, W. Kautz, and J. A. Z. Leedle. 2003. Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials and yeast on site and extent of digestion, blood chemistry, and subclinical ruminal acidosis in feedlot cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 81: 1628-1640. Beeman, K. 1985. The effect of Lactobacillus spp. on convalescing calves. Agripractice 6:8 10. Berge, A. C. B., T. E. Besser, D. A. Moore, and W. M. Sischo. 2009. Evaluation of the effects of oral colostrum supplementation during the first fourteen days on the health and performance of preweaned calves. J. Dairy Sci. 92:286-295. Cruywagen, C. W., I. Jordaan, and L. Venter. 1996. Effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus supplementation of milk replacer on preweaning performance of calves. J. Dairy Sci. 79:483-486. 40

Donovan, D. C., S. T. Franklin, C. C. L. Chase, and A. R. Hippen. 2002. Growth and health of Holstein calves fed milk replacers supplemented with antibiotics or enteroguard. J. Dairy Sci. 85:947-950. Duff, G. C., and C. P. McMurphy. 2007. Feeding Holstein steers from start to finish. 2007. Vet. Clin. Food Anim. 23:281-297. Elam, N. A., J. F. Gleghorn, J. D. Rivera, M. L. Gaylean, P. J. Defoor, M. M. Brashears, and S. M. Younts-Dahl. 2003. Effects of live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus (strains NP45 and NP51) and Propionibacterium freudenreichii on performance, carcass, and intestinal characteristics, and Escherichia coli strain O157 shedding of finishing beef steers. J. Anim. Sci. 81: 2686-2698. Ellinger, D. K., L. D. Muller, and P. J. Glantz. 1980. Influence of feeding fermented colostrum and Lactobacillus acidophilus on fecal flora of dairy calves. J. Dairy Sci. 63:478 482. Fuller. 1977. The importance of lactobacilli in maintaining normal microbial balance in the crop. Br. Poult. Sci. 18:85 94. Galyean, M. L., G. A. Nunnery, P. J. Defoor, G. B. Salyer, and C. H. Parsons. 2000. Effects of live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus (Strains 45 and 51) and Propionibacterium freudenreichii PF-24 on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing beef steers. Available: http://www.asft.ttu.edu/burnettcenter/progressreports/bc8.pdf. Ghorbani, G. R., D. P. Morgavi, K. A. Beauchemin, and J. A. Z. Leedle. 2002. Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials on ruminal fermentation, blood variables, and the microbial populations of feedlot cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 80:1977 1986. Gilliland, S. E., and M. L. Speck. 1977. Antagonistic action of Lactobacillus acidophilus toward intestinal and food borne pathogens in associative cultures. J. Food Prot. 40:820 823. Godden, S. M., J. P. Fetrow, J. M. Feirtag, L. R. Green and S. J. Wells. 2005. Economic anlaysis of feeding pasteurized nonsaleable milk versus conventional milk replacer to dairy calves. J. Amer. Vet. Med. Assoc. 226:1547-1554. Harrison, H. N., R. G. Warner, E. G. Sander, and J. K. Loosli. 1960. Changes in the tissue and volume of the stomachs of calves following the removal of dry feed or consumption of inert bulk. J. Dairy Sci. 43:1301 1312. Heinrichs, J. 2005. Rumen development in the dairy calf. Advances in Dairy Technology 17:179-187. Heinrichs, A. J., C. M. Jones, and B. S. Heinrichs. 2003. Effects of mannan oligosaccharide or antibiotics in neonatal diets on health and growth of dairy calves. J. Dairy Sci. 86:4064-4069. Hill, T M., H. G. Bateman II, J. M. Aldrick, and R. L. Schlotterbeck. 2008. Crude protein for diets fed to weaned dairy calves. Prof. Anim. Sci. 24:596-603. Huck, G. L., K. K. Kreikemeier, and G. A. Ducharme. 2000. Effect of feeding two microbial additives in sequence on growth performance and carcass characteristics of finishing heifers. Available: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/library/lvstk2/srp850.pdf. Krehbiel, C. R., S. R. Rust, G. Zhang, and S. E. Gilliland. 2003. Bacterial direct-fed microbials in ruminant diets: Performance response and mode of action. J. Anim. Sci. 81(E. Suppl. 2):E120-E132. Lane, M. A., and B. W. Jesse. 1997. Effect of volatile fatty acid infusion on development of the rumen. J. Dairy Sci. 80:740-746. Lehloenya, K. V., C. R. Krehbiel, K. J. Mertz, T. G. Rehberger, and L. J. Spicer. 2008. Effects of Propionibacteria and yeast culture fed to steers on nutrient intake and site and extent of digestion. J. Dairy Sci. 91:653-662. 41

Lesmeister, K. E. and A. J. Heinrichs. 2004. Effects of corn processing on growth characteristics, rumen development, and rumen parameters in neonatal dairy calves. J. Dairy Sci. 87:3439-3450. Maas, J., and P. H. Robinson. 2007. Preparing Holstein steer calves for the feedlot. Vet. Clin. Food Anim. 23:269-279. Maeng, W. J., C. W. Kim, and H. T. Shin. 1987. Effect of a lactic acid bacteria concentrate (Streptococcus faecium Cernelle 68) on growth rate and scouring prevention in dairy calves. J. Dairy Sci. 9:204 210. McCullough, J. S., B. Ratcliffe, N. Mandir, K. E. Carr, and R. A. Goodlad. 1998. Dietary fibre and intestinal microflora: effects on intestinal morphometry and crypt branching. Gut 42:799-806. Morrill, J. L., A. D. Dayton, and R. Mickelsen. 1977. Cultured milk and antibiotics for young calves. J. Dairy Sci. 60:1105 1109. OBrien, M. L., K. J. Touchette, J. A. Coalson, R. M. Costello, T. Rehberger, and B. Galbraith. 2003. Effect of a novel direct-fed microbial in a calf milk replacer. J. Dairy Sci. 86 (Suppl. 1), 22 (Abstract). Quigley, J. 2001. CalfNotes.com. Calf Note #39. Using a refractometer. Available at: http://www.calfnotes.com/pdffiles/cn039.pdf. Quigley, III, J. D. 1996. Influence of weaning methods on growth, intake, and selected blood metabolites in Jersey calves. J. Dairy Sci. 79:2255-2260. Rivera, J. D., G. C. Duff, M. L. Galyean, D. M. Hallford, and T. T. Ross. 2003. Effects of graded levels of vitamin E on inflammatory response and evaluation of methods of supplementing vitamin E on performance and health of beef steers. Prof. Anim. Sci. 19:171-177. Ruzante, J. M., I. A. Gardner, J. S. Cullor, W. L. Smith, J. H. Kirk, and J. M. Adaska. 2008. Isolation of Mycobacterium avium subsp paratuberculosis from Waste Milk Delivered to California Calf Ranches Foodborne Path. and Dis.. 5:681-686. doi:10.1089/fpd.2008.0082. Savage, D. C. 1986. Gastrointestinal microflora in mammalian nutrition. Ann. Rev. Nutr. 6:155-178. Tamate, H., A. D. McGillard, N. L. Jacobson, and R. Getty. 1962. Effect of various dietaries on the anatomical development of the stomach in the calf. J. Dairy Sci. 45:408. USDA APHIS. 2007 Dairy 2007: Part 1: Reference of dairy cattle health and management practices in the United States. Available at: http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/dairy/dairy07/dairy2007_parti.pdf. Van Amburgh, M. 2003. Calf growth and development: new requirements and implications for future performance. Pages 1-13 in Proc. Southwest Nutrition and Management Conference. University of Arizona, Tucson. Van Amburgh, M. 2008. Early life management and long-term productivity of dairy calves. Pages 46-52 in Proc. Southwest Nutrition and Management Conference. University of Arizona, Tucson. Vasconcelos, J. T., N. A. Elam, M. M. Brashears, and M. L. Galyean. 2008. Effects of increasing dose of live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus (Strain NP 51) combined with a single dose of Propionibacerium freudenreichii (Strain NP 24) on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing beef steers. J. Anim. Sci. 86:756-762. 42

Ware, D. R., P. L. Read, and E. T. Manfredi. 1988a. Lactation performance of two large dairy herds fed Lactobacillus acidophilus strain BT138 in a switchback experiment. J. Dairy. Sci. 71(Suppl. 1):219. Ware, D. R., P. L. Read, and E. T. Manfredi. 1988b. Pooled summary of eight feedlot trials evaluating performance and carcass characteristics of steers fed Lactobacillus acidophilus strain BT138. J. Anim. Sci. 66(Suppl. 1):436. Warner, R. G., W. P. Flatt, and J. K. Loosli. 1956. Dietary factors influencing the development of the ruminant stomach. J. Agric. Food Chem. 4:788-792. 43

HIGH COW REPORT April 2009 MILK Arizona Owner Barn# Age Milk New Mexico Owner Barn # Age Milk *Riggin Ranch 98,095 04-06 36110 Mccatharn DAIRY 2529 4-03 35,118 *Goldman Dairy 7,108 08-04 34640 S.A.S. Dairy 8511 5-05 34,829 *Riggin Ranch 97,028 05-08 33990 Red Roof Dairy 596 6-02 34,441 *Riggin Ranch 96,824 06-00 33800 Arrowhead Dairy 4370 5-02 33,894 *Shamrock Farms 14,401 05-02 33760 Pareo Dairy 6831 4-07 33,885 *Danzeisen Dairy, Llc. 75 03-11 33010 Pareo Dairy 3345 6-09 33,793 *Shamrock Farms 18,821 04-02 32650 Arrowhead Dairy 4323 7-00 33,765 *Stotz Dairy 23,757 03-03 32190 *Vaz Dairy 942 4-04 33,720 *Stotz Dairy 23,427 03-06 31870 Arrowhead Dairy 4049 6-02 33,690 *Riggin Ranch 97,624 05-00 31,860 *Vaz Dairy 4384 4-08 33,630 FAT *Stotz Dairy 20,070 06-03 1,401 Pareo Dairy 6831 4-07 1,629 *Stotz Dairy 23,757 03-03 1,372 S.A.S. Dairy 4657 7-08 1,345 *Riggin Ranch 97,028 05-08 1,330 S.A.S. Dairy 8511 5-05 1,324 *Stotz Dairy 23,580 03-05 1,321 Red Roof Dairy 596 6-02 1,290 *Riggin Ranch 98,095 04-06 1,314 Arrowhead Dairy 4370 5-02 1,262 *Rio Blanco Dairy 7,441 05-06 1,299 Arrowhead Dairy 4323 7-00 1,254 *Stotz Dairy 17,791 07-04 1,277 Pareo Dairy 5606 5-10 1,250 *Mike Pylman 27,788 02-01 1,263 Pareo Dairy 10558 4-02 1,236 *Goldman Dairy 8,006 03-06 1,240 Mccatharn Dairy 2529 4-03 1,215 *Goldman Dairy 8,039 03-01 1,193 *Providence Dairy 3112 ------ 1,199 PROTEIN *Riggin Ranch 97,028 05-08 1,004 S.A.S. Dairy 8511 5-05 1,140 *Danzeisen Dairy, Llc. 75 03-11 991 Mccatharn Dairy 2529 4-03 1,109 *Stotz Dairy 23,757 03-03 979 S.A.S. Dairy 4657 7-08 1,089 *Riggin Ranch 96,824 06-00 973 Pareo Dairy 6831 4-07 1,075 Paul Rovey Dairy 7,694 03-07 967 Arrowhead Dairy 4323 7-00 1,073 *Goldman Dairy 7,108 08-04 966 *Providence Dairy 9400 8-03 1,065 *Riggin Ranch 98,095 04-06 944 S.A.S. Dairy 477 3-10 1,048 *Shamrock Farms 14,401 05-02 930 Arrowhead Dairy 4370 5-02 1,035 *Riggin Ranch 99,082 03-08 923 Red Rof Dairy 596 6-02 1,022 *Stotz Dairy 17,791 07-04 919 Caballo Dairy M177 3-10 1,021 *all or part of lactation is 3X or 4X milking

ARIZONA - TOP 50% FOR F.C.M.b April 2009 OWNERS NAME Number of Cows MILK FAT 3.5 FCM DIM *Stotz Dairy West 2,166 25,843 957 26,695 228 *Goldman Dairy 2,400 24,959 855 24,657 204 *Riggin Ranch 1,305 24,633 844 24,338 212 *Danzeisen Dairy, Inc. 1,951 24,269 850 24,278 223 *Shamrock Farms 8,298 24,724 809 23,809 215 *Stotz Dairy East 999 22,972 829 23,377 218 *Withrow Dairy 5,218 23,104 811 23,142 200 Lunts Dairy 681 22,376 822 23,006 180 *Zimmerman Dairy 1,206 22,423 782 22,377 201 Paul Rovey Dairy 85 21,999 778 22,129 200 *Rio Blanco Dairy 2,128 20,189 823 22,078 199 *Parker Dairy 4,404 22,027 773 22,060 210 *Saddle Mountain 2,999 21,242 775 21,753 196 *Cliffs Dairy 330 20,964 781 21,731 215 *Mike Pylman 6,129 21,962 742 21,529 244 *DC Dairy, LLC 1,128 21,396 754 21,474 *Yettem 3,686 17,985 838 21,361 *Shamrock Farms Emerald 18 20,169 760 21,047 245 *Shamrock Farms Organic 928 20,714 683 20,032 193 *Dutch View Dairy 2,359 20,395 684 19,910 228 NEW MEXICO - TOP 50% FOR F.C.M.b April 2009 OWNERS NAME Number of Cows MILK FAT 3.5 FCM CI *SAS 2,013 24,616 936 25,822 13.10 McCatharn 1,121 25,446 906 25,695 13.20 *Pareo 2 1,671 24,380 900 25,136 13.40 *Butterfield 2,282 27,262 821 25,101 13.10 *Clover Knolls 3,499 25,011 844 24,501 12.90 *Milagro 3,481 23,801 874 24,464 13.82 *Do-Rene 2,411 24,794 827 24,132 12.00 *Vaz 2,130 23,164 859 23,946 14.70 Vaz 2 1,969 22,942 857 23,817 14.00 *Providence 3,313 23,348 824 23,458 13.30 *Goff 6,033 24,421 785 23,289 13.30 *Tee Vee 1,137 22,504 821 23,044 14.12 Ridgecrest 3,916 22,725 811 22,977 12.40 *Tallmon 539 21,911 830 22,934 13.70 *Pareo 3,753 22,235 815 22,830 13.50 Cross Country 3,894 22,286 807 22,723 12.90 * all or part of lactation is 3X or 4X milking b average milk and fat figure may be different from monthly herd summary; figures used are last day/month

ARIZONA AND NEW MEXICO HERD IMPROVEMENT SUMMARY FOR OFFICIAL HERDS TESTED April 2009 ARIZONA NEW MEXICO 1. Number of Herds 30 24.00 2. Total Cows in Herd 63,789 59,291 3. Average Herd Size 2126 2470 4. Percent in Milk 91 87 5. Average Days in Milk 200 202 6. Average Milk All Cows Per Day 64.1 64.65 7. Average Percent Fat All Cows 3.5 3.62 8. Total Cows in Milk 59,038 51,583 9. Average Daily Milk for Milking Cows 69.1 70.08 10. Average Days in Milk 1st Breeding 88 76.56 11. Average Days Open 153 148 12. Average Calving Interval 14.2 14.13 13. Percent Somatic Cell Low 85 83 14. Percent Somatic Cell Medium 10 13 15. Percent Somatic Cell High 5 4 16. Average Previous Days Dry 64 624 17. Percent Cows Leaving Herd 34 34 Milk 21,811 19,897 Percent butterfat 3.55 3.61 Percent protein 3.02 3.13 Pounds butterfat 773 846 Pounds protein 656 702

Department of Animal Sciences 1650 E. Limberlost Drive Tucson, AZ 85719 Phone: 520-626-1754 Fax: 520-626-1283 Email: stefanic@ag.arizona.edu SAVE THE DATE Arizona Dairy Production Conference Hilton Garden Inn Phoenix, AZ October 15, 2009