Newsletter – 2018 – October

President's message

From the DCRC President’s Desk
By Ronaldo Cerri

The DCRC Annual Meeting is right around the corner, so there’s no time like the present to get registered for this informative, dynamic and interactive event. Please register today! Online registration ends Oct. 31. After that date, you must register on site. Reminder: This year’s meeting reverts to DCRC’s traditional Thursday/Friday format, rather than the Wednesday/Thursday format we used last year.

Rafael Bisinotto and the program committee have pulled together an information-packed agenda. Key subject areas include environmental and societal scrutiny of the dairy industry, the future of reproductive management and implementation of targeted therapies, and maximizing cow comfort through facility design and heat abatement.

Furthermore, our generous sponsors – Arm & Hammer Animal Nutrition, Merck and Zoetis – are delivering a preconference symposium. This provides additional instructional time for meeting attendees at no extra charge. Topics include “Microbial Terroir,” “Earning Consumer Trust in Modern Dairy Practices,” and “Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus Control: Biosecurity, Testing and Removal, and Immunization.”

For more information about this year’s meeting venue – The Westin Indianapolis – click here. DCRC has negotiated a room rate of $159/night (plus taxes). The group rate is available until Oct. 4, and is subject to availability. BOOK HERE! 

Travel stipends available

Reminder: In our efforts to attract new members and attendees to the annual meeting, DCRC offers a limited number of $100 travel stipends for dairy herd veterinarians and dairy producers to attend the DCRC Annual Meeting. (DCRC Herd Repro award winners are not eligible for this travel stipend.) To secure one of the 20 travel stipends, which are available on a first-come, first-served basis, contact JoDee Sattler at: jodee@dcrcouncil.org.

For veterinarians, the American Association of Veterinary State Boards RACE committee approved the DCRC Annual Meeting for 18 CE credits (14 maximum). This is a great opportunity for bovine practitioners to fulfill continuing education requirements.

I look forward to seeing you in Indianapolis!

Webinars

Just two more webinars remain for 2018. I encourage you to sit back, listen and learn. The remaining webinars are listed below:

Julio Giordano, Impact of Voluntary Waiting Period Duration on the Reproductive Performance and Profitability (Sponsored by Merck)

October 25, 2018, at 1 p.m. Central Time

Register Here

Pablo Pinedo (Spanish Webinar), Rasgos genómicos asociados con la fertilidad de las vacas lecheras

December 19, 2018, at 1 p.m. Central Time

Register Here

For more information, email Dr. Fabio Lima, DCRC Education Committee Chair, at flima@illinois.edu or email DCRC at dcrc@dcrcouncil.org.

Strategic plan update

As you know, DCRC is working on a strategic plan to map out our path of meeting our members’ (and the industry’s) needs in the next several years. Over the past month the board and others have worked on selecting members to serve on various sub-committees of the Strategic Plan Committee. We will provide an update for our members at the meeting in Indianapolis.

Protocol revisions

Lastly, I’d like to share that a dedicated DCRC team revisited the advancements in applied reproductive sciences and updated the reproductive management strategies sheets for dairy cows and heifers. The team also redesigned the protocol sheets to remove clutter and keep the essential information clear for users.

The protocols have as foundation scientific evidence curated by multiple specialists. This update included additional, novel information, with the possibility of using a second prostaglandin 24 hours after the first prostaglandin in the synchronization methods for timed artificial insemination to improve luteolysis and conception. The update also added the suggestion that the presence or absence of corpus luteum can be a criterion to decide which strategy to use for resynchronization.

DCRC will also be working on developing other dynamic and interactive tools, which could be used to create protocols that reflect the current program used by producers, with suggestions of what could be changed and what to expect with those changes. To access DCRC’s dairy reproduction protocols, go to: www.dcrcouncil.org/protocols.

Research Summaries

Effect of adding a second prostaglandin F2α injection during the Ovsynch protocol on luteal regression and fertility in lactating dairy cows: A meta-analysis

A group of researchers from Berlin and University of Wisconsin performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the additional treatment of prostaglandin F2α (PGF) on luteolysis and pregnancy. The results are published in the Journal of Dairy Science.

  • Authors explained that research findings indicate that incomplete luteal regression after treatment with a single dose of PGFduring an Ovsynch protocol decreases fertility to timed artificial insemination (TAI).
  • Researchers pointed out that to increase the proportion of cows with complete luteal regression and subsequently pregnancy per artificial insemination (P/AI), additional treatment with PGF 24 h after the first has been recommended.
  • The current meta-analysis was performed to systematically review the literature with the objective of evaluating the effects of adding a second PGF treatment during the Ovsynch protocol on luteal regression and reproductive performance in lactating dairy cows.
  • Authors reported that reproductive outcomes of interest were luteal regression at the end of the Ovsynch protocol and P/AI measured 32 to 39 d after TAI from 7 randomized controlled experiments from 6 published manuscripts including 5,356 cows.
  • Data presented in the meta-analysis for luteal regression was from 1,856 cows in which a second PGF treatment on d 8 during the Ovsynch protocol increased the relative risk (RR) of complete luteal regression at the end of the Ovsynch protocol.
  • Authors also reported that RR for pregnancy was increased at 32 d after TAI.

In summary, the study revealed a clear benefit of an additional PGF treatment during the Ovsynch protocol on luteal regression (11.6% increase) and P/AI (4.6% increase). The meta-analytical assessment helped to prove biologically essential treatment effects of relatively small magnitude (i.e., P/AI). Authors deliberate that although most of the studies reported a significant (P < 0.05) increase in complete luteolysis after adding a second PGF treatment on d 8, most of them failed to detect a significant effect on pregnancy, which likely was a type II error (declaring no difference between groups when a difference does exist). The increase in P/AI in all treated cows was rather small and the likelihood of detecting a treatment effect on P/AI was limited because most of the studies were statistically underpowered to detect a 3 to 5 percentage point increase in P/AI.

Access the manuscript

Access the abstract


Associations of subclinical hypocalcemia with fertility in a herd of grazing dairy cows

A group of researchers from Argentina assesed the associations of subclinical hypocalcemia (SCH), diagnosed at parturition (SCH-0) and 7 d in milk (SCH-7), with fertility in a herd of grazing dairy cows. They also looked at whether or not calcium concentrations at calving and d 7 postpartum are associated with metritis, endometritis, subclinical ketosis and culling. The results are published in the Journal of Dairy Science.

  • Authors reported that Holstein cows (n = 126) were body condition scored (BCS, 1-5) on -21 (±3), 0, 7 (±3) and 28 (±7) days in milk (DIM), and blood was collected on 0 and 7 (±3) DIM to determine Ca and β-hydroxybutyrate concentrations.
  • Researchers indicated that calcium concentrations <2.0 and <2.14 mmol/L were used to define SCH-0 and SCH-7, respectively.
  • The study revealed that calcium concentrations were similar at 0 and 7 DIM (2.40 vs. 2.41 mmol/L, respectively) and concentrations were higher in cows calving in the fall than in summer (2.58 vs. 2.24 mmol/L), and higher in primiparous than in multiparous cows (2.53 vs. 2.28 mmol/L, respectively).
  • Authors also reported that the proportion of cows having SCH-0 and SCH-7 was 27.3 and 39.3%, respectively; and fall-calving cows had lower odds for SCH-0 than summer-calving cows.
  • Moreover, multiparous cows had higher odds for SCH-0 than primiparous cows, and cows with prepartum BCS ≥3.00 had higher odds for SCH-0 than cows with BCS <3.00.
  • Authors reported that parity and prepartum BCS were not important predictors for SCH-7 and SCH-0 was not a risk factor for SCH-7.
  • Researchers also indicated that cows with SCH at calving had lower odds for pregnancy at first service than normocalcemic cows, 14% versus 38%, respectively.
  • Furthermore, cows with SCH at calving had lower risk of pregnancy, taking 32 d longer (105 vs. 73) than normocalcemic cows to get pregnant. However, SCH-7 was not associated with fertility.
  • Authors also revealed that SCH-0 and SCH-7 were associated with risk for subclinical ketosis and metritis, respectively.

In conclusion, the study revealed that SCH at parturition, but not at 7 DIM, was associated with lower pregnancy outcomes. The authors suggested that it would be better to evaluate cows for SCH on calving day, rather than testing 7 d later.

Access the manuscript

Access the abstract


Pregnancy-induced expression of interferon-stimulated genes in the cervical and vaginal mucosal membranes

In efforts to reduce days to pregnancy in dairy cows, it is critical to detect, as soon as possible, non-pregnant cows and perform a new AI without losing time. Interferon-Tau, a pregnancy recognition signal produced by the embryonic trophectoderm before implantation, induces the expression of other interferon-stimulated genes (ISG) in the endometrium, such as IFN-stimulated protein 15 kDa (ISG15), and myxovirus-resistance protein 1 and 2 (MX1, MX2). Kunii et al. (2018) hypothesized that the expression of ISG from pregnant cows could also be detected in cervical and vaginal tissues, due to their adjacency to the uterus.

In this study, mucosal membrane samples of the cervical canal near the external os (cervix) and deep vaginal wall surrounding the external os (vagina) were collected separately from 23 cows, by scraping with a curette on d 17 or 18 of pregnancy (d 1 = ovulation), the time of maximal IFNT secretion into the maternal uterus. Pregnancy diagnosis was performed on d 30 and 60, and samples were classified as pregnant or nonpregnant, and compared for expression of ISG15, MX1 and MX2, using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction.

  • The ISG ISG15, MX1 and MX2 were detected in the cervix and vagina of pregnant cows, and the relative mRNA expression was significantly higher in pregnant cows than those not pregnant.
  • The ISG15 expression in the cervix and vagina of pregnant cows was about 80-fold and 20-fold higher than that in the corresponding nonpregnant cows.
  • The sampling process of the mucosal membrane of the cervix and vagina had little or no harmful effect on pregnancy.

Cervical or vaginal mucosal membrane samples are less invasive and easy to measure.  Results have high accuracy and these membrane sample results are a way to detect pregnancy-associated response to stimulation of ISG genes.

Access the manuscript

Featured Column

Repro technologies to consider – genomics, IVF

By JoDee Sattler, DCRC marketing & communications director

Playing the elite genetic merit game is not for the faint of heart. While the rewards are high (i.e., six-figure sale prices), so are the risks (e.g., cattle die, animal’s estimated genetic worth doesn’t materialize, limited success with embryo transfer).

While most cattle aren’t “elite” (top 0.1 percent of the population), genomic testing and advanced reproductive technologies can help all dairy producers greatly improve their herds’ genetic level, with minimal risk and investment.

Where should you start? First, evaluate your herd’s current genetic status. Calculate the average lifetime net merit (NM$) of your lactating cows, heifers and calves. If your herd has outstanding genetics – average NM$ of at least $500 for your heifer calves – consider building your herd from within by using sexed semen, in vitro fertilization (IVF) or both to propagate your best females and replace the bottom half of your herd.

‘Average’ herd: Purchase outside genetics

With a more average herd – let’s say, NM$ average of approximately $300 – then you may want to consider a different strategy. One option is to use genomics and IVF from outside genetic sources. For example, purchase a group of “sub-elite” heifers that rank in the top 2 percent of the breed. Rather than spending $100,000 on one exceptional calf with a genomic predicted transmitting ability (PTA) of $1,000, for example, invest approximately the same amount of money on 20 to 30 heifers at the next genetic level, such as a genomic PTA of about $800. Then, use these heifers to form the genetic foundation of your herd.

If you are a little more patient when it comes to genetic progress, invest heavily in semen from top genomic young sires for two generations. Then, look at propagating your top females with IVF. Dairy producers can make remarkable genetic progress quickly, and with a much smaller investment, by breeding their cows and heifers to top artificial insemination (AI) bulls with genomic PTA of $850 to $950.

Used properly, genomic testing can yield positive economic returns. The magnitude of returns depends on the gain in reliability resulting from genomic testing. Without pedigree information, reliability of heifer calves was 0.00 before testing, compared with 0.48 after testing. Using genomic testing to identify the top 10, 20 or 30 percent of heifer calves that should be propagated preferentially using sexed semen, embryo transfer or IVF is always economically sensible. Another complementary strategy is to use genomic testing to identify the bottom 30, 20 or 10 percent of heifer calves to cull from the herd.

With pedigree info, just genotype top half

When complete pedigree information is available, gains in reliability resulting from genomic testing are much smaller. Selectively genotyping the top half of heifer calves, as ranked by parent average (PA) for NM$, is a more profitable way to identify potential embryo donors or heifers to mate with sexed semen than genotyping all calves in a herd. At the other end of the spectrum, the gain is small from using genomic testing to identify the bottom 30, 20 or 10 percent of heifer calves for culling. However, profits of $10 or $20 per calf can add up over time.

Keep in mind that selective genotyping of specific groups of heifer calves, such as the top, middle or bottom, ranked by PA for NM$, may not be best when one considers all possible uses of genomic information in cattle breeding and herd management decisions. Identifying the top heifer calves for mating with sexed semen, or identifying the bottom heifer calves for early culling, are just two of the many potential uses of genomic information throughout an animal’s lifetime. Other options include using genomic data to minimize inbreeding, avoid mating carriers of inherited defects, and target management of heifers and cows that are at risk for specific health, calving or fertility problems.

Sexed semen on select heifers hastens genetic progress

Some dairies use sexed semen on heifers and/or cows with the highest genomic PTA. The remaining females are inseminated with conventional semen. Economic feasibility studies (Sorensen et al., 2011; Kaniyamattam et al., 2016) evaluated this strategy with or without genomic testing. Results showed that using sexed semen in yearling heifers can increase genetic progress per year compared with conventional or sexed semen in lactating cows, particularly when coupled with early culling of inferior calves.

And yet another option is to use beef semen on below-average females. This strategy generates greater market value in the resulting calves. Along with using beef semen on poor females, increase the percentage of above-average females bred with sexed semen. The main challenge in mating below-average cows and heifers with beef semen is that you will not create a surplus of dairy heifer calves in the next generation (that’s sort of the point), and this means you won’t have an opportunity to sort among those extra heifer calves using genomic testing the next time around.

Hjorto et al. (2015) simulated varying proportions of using sexed and/or beef semen in yearling heifers and first-parity cows in herds with poor, average or good reproductive performance. For herds with poor reproductive performance, net financial returns per “slot” in the herd were greatest when sexed semen was used in 80 percent of heifers and 0 percent of cows. For herds with average or good reproductive performance, returns were maximized when sexed semen was used in 60 percent of heifers and 40 percent of cows. Please note that differences exist between Weigel et al., 2012; and Hjorto et al., 2015. In the Weigel study, genomic test results were used for early culling of low-merit heifer calves. In the Hjorto study, no heifer calves were culled and genomic test results were used to determine which animals should be bred with sexed semen.

In summary, genomic testing and advanced reproductive technologies work great together. Pairing genomic testing with heavy use of IVF in elite heifers and cows will maximize genetic progress, but at a very high cost. Most of the benefit can be achieved at a tiny fraction of the price by mating the best females – say, the top 50 percent of heifers and top 25 percent of first-lactation cows – with sexed semen from the best young genomic bulls available. If you have a good market for surplus dairy heifer calves, mate the remaining cows and heifers with conventional semen from top young genomic bulls. Otherwise, consider mating your lower-end cows with beef semen to capture a little extra revenue at the auction barn.

This article is based on Kent Weigel’s presentation given at the 2017 DCRC Annual Meeting. To access the proceedings paper, go to the DCRC Members Only page of the DCRC website (www.dcrcouncil.org/member-center).

Research Article

DCRC appreciates the generous support of its Platinum sponsors. One Platinum sponsor benefit is the opportunity to publish company-supplied research in a DCRC newsletter. Boehringer Ingelheim provided the following article.

Transition Cow Management Holds the Key to a Successful Lactation

Help prevent health issues and enhance productivity in your herd

“There’s a lot that can go wrong during the transition phase,” said Mark van der List, senior professional services veterinarian with Boehringer Ingelheim. “Their body undergoes many metabolic changes. It’s a high-risk period for dairy cows.” Diligent management techniques, proper nutrition and monitoring can help mitigate potential problems. Cows that undergo a successful transition may experience higher milk production, a reduction in post-calving disorders and improved reproductive performance (1).

Consider including the following protocols on your operation for a successful transition period:

Three weeks prior to calving

The close-up dry cow diet should be well-formulated and include quality feed ingredients. “Dry cows need a sufficient amount of protein, vitamins and minerals in their diet to meet energy requirements without increasing their body condition score,” van der List stated. “Over-conditioned cows are more likely to develop metabolic problems.”

“We also want to supplement dry cows with anionic salts, creating a negative dietary cation-anion difference (DCAD) diet,” he added. “This can help maintain blood calcium levels after freshening, which are tied to a cow’s future milk production and post-calving health.” Producers can ensure their DCAD diet is balanced correctly by monitoring urine pH (1). “It’s important to make sure the DCAD diet is still palatable for cows,” van der List continued. “We don’t want to be losing body condition, either.”

Close-up dry cows need plenty of space to rest. “Monitoring stocking density in the dry cow area is essential,” emphasized van der List. “Overcrowding puts additional stress on the already vulnerable cow.” Other ways to avoid stress include minimizing pen movements and keeping cows cool with fans and sprinklers in warmer temperatures (2).

At calving 

“We want the calving area to be clean with good facilities if intervention is required,” said van der List. “The goal is to have calm, injury-free calving.” The person in charge of the calving pen should be well-trained, able to recognize the signs of calving, and know when to intervene (3).

Three weeks post calving

“The first few days after calving are really about calcium control,” remarked van der List. “We want to make sure these animals aren’t dealing with subclinical hypocalcemia (SCH). I’d recommend supplementing all second- and greater-lactation cows with an oral calcium supplement, in which they get one bolus at calving and one bolus the day after calving. If we can control calcium levels, we can head off a lot of other problems.”

van der List recommends consulting with your veterinarian to get a better idea of SCH prevalence in your herd. “A veterinarian can help retrieve blood samples of recently fresh cows to determine blood calcium concentrations,” he noted. These test results can be used to build and execute an economically viable control strategy for SCH.

A fresh cow diet should encourage dry matter intake by offering high-quality forage and making feed accessible at all times. This will help ease the negative energy balance the fresh cow is facing (4).

If possible, put fresh cows in a separate pen. Stocking rate is important, as you do not want cows competing for bunk access (1). “Mixing already at-risk fresh cows in a sick pen isn’t ideal, either,” said van der List. “A fresh cow’s immune system might already be compromised, making them more susceptible to the diseases found in the sick pen.”

A separate pen also allows for closer monitoring. “Producers should be checking fresh cows at least twice a day, observing the front and back ends of the cow,” he said. When looking at the front of the cow, observe the ears, eyes, nasal discharge and attitude. When looking at the hind end of the cow, check for uterine discharge, udder and rumen fill, manure consistency and hoof and leg health (1). “Record any instances of treatment,” van der List concluded. “This will help producers track performance and identify areas that may need improvement.”

van der List encourages working with a veterinarian to develop and implement a comprehensive transition cow program suited for your operation.

References

  1. Litherland, N. Got a fresh cow pen? University of Minnesota Extension. 2011. Available at: https://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/dairy/facilities/got-a-fresh-cow-pen. Accessed March 22, 2018.
  2. Arthur, L., D. Nolan, and D.M. Amaral-Phillips. Managing transition dairy cows. University of Kentucky, Department of Animal and Food Sciences (Dairy Extension Services). Available at: https://afs.ca.uky.edu/dairy/managing-transition-dairy-cows. Accessed March 20, 2018.
  3. Kieser, L. When to assist with calving. University of Minnesota Extension. 2013. Available at: https://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/dairy/health-and-comfort/when-to-assist-with-calving. Accessed March 20, 2018.
  4. Arthur, L., D. Nolan, and D.M. Amaral-Phillips. Fresh-dairy cow management. University of Kentucky, Department of Animal and Food Sciences (Dairy Extension Services). Available at: https://afs.ca.uky.edu/dairy/fresh-dairy-cow-management. Accessed March 22, 2018. Accessed March 22, 2018.
Featured Member

Featured Member

Editor’s Note: Each issue, DCRC interviews a member to learn more about his/her career, involvement with DCRC and thoughts about dairy cattle and reproduction. We encourage you to recommend someone for this feature by contacting JoDee Sattler at: JoDee@dcrcouncil.org

Matthew “Matt” Utt
Select Sires Inc.
Director of Data Innovation
Plain City, Ohio
DCRC Member since 2012

The director of data innovation of Select Sires Inc. (SSI), a federation of eight farmer-owned-and-controlled cooperatives, Matthew “Matt” Utt began his employment with SSI as a research associate, studying sperm biology and bull fertility, and became the co-op’s director of research the following year. In his current role, Matt’s responsibilities include looking for new ways to use data for supporting various departments and programs throughout the Select Sires federation. He’s also developing tools that help dairy and beef producers. This requires the ability to bring together, analyze and visualize data from several sources. In addition, Matt’s duties include facilitating collaborative projects within the Select Sires federation, academic institutions or allied industry.

Compared to many of his AI peers, Matt took a road less traveled to land in a bovine reproduction career. As musicians, Matt’s parents weren’t directly connected to animal agriculture. However, Matt’s grandparents lived in rural areas near his home in Richmond, Va. One set of grandparents kept dairy and beef heifers for a local dairy producer. Matt recalled vivid childhood memories of drinking milk out of the bulk tank from that dairy. The “seeds” planted on Grandpa and Grandma’s farm triggered an interest in animal agriculture.

In 2000, Matt earned his bachelor’s degree from Virginia Tech in animal and poultry sciences and developed an interest in bovine reproduction. As an undergrad, Matt took a dairy reproductive management class, which he really enjoyed. “I never thought I’d be studying that for a living almost 20 years later,” he said. Matt continued his education at Virginia Tech and earned a master’s degree. His research involved working with estrous synchronization and the use of CIDRs (controlled internal drug release) in beef cattle. Following stints at the University of Wisconsin and Virginia Tech working as a research associate/laboratory manager, Matt headed to The Ohio State University to pursue a doctorate degree in male reproductive biology, sponsored by SSI.

Despite his more recent studies in bovine male reproduction, Matt maintains an interest in bovine female reproduction. Now focusing on dairy reproductive management, Matt finds this an exciting challenge because, biologically, the lactating dairy cow presents physiological challenges to achieve and maintain pregnancy. He also enjoys looking at the economics of reproductive and other management practices on the dairy.

Matt joined DCRC in 2012 when he attended his first DCRC Annual Meeting. A past member of the program committee, he currently serves on the DCRC board of directors. A strong proponent of continuing education, Matt finds DCRC valuable because it helps gather the right people, with various vantage points, to discuss dairy reproductive management program opportunities and best practices.

While he hesitates to use the word “truth,” Matt views DCRC as a source of truth. This information comes from academia, industry and veterinary members, who together flush out the greatest opportunities from the less-meaningful and even erroneous ones.

“I see DCRC as the forum to discuss all the new and great opportunities/innovations,” he said. “Yet, at the same time, DCRC boils it all down to recommendations/tools that can be implemented on dairies.”

Matt views reproductive management programs as a compartmentalized system. The estrous synchronization protocols, many of which were developed and refined by DCRC members, are the major component. However, “the success of a protocol is ultimately affected by what goes in and what happens to what comes out,” said Matt. “For example, are cows entering these protocols with maximum likelihood of responding to them? If so, was administration of the protocol and breeding performed in a way to maximize success? Finally, if conception did in fact occur, why does it not always result in a calf?”

Matt believes that DCRC was formed so that leaders in the field of dairy cattle reproduction could discuss opportunities, such as estrous synchronization protocols, and provide better service and actionable recommendations to dairy producers. “Based on my experience, DCRC members and leaders are very passionate about what they do and the potential it has to affect the dairy producers they serve,” said Matt. “DCRC continues to draw sizeable attendance to its annual meetings and provide a program offering the ‘meat and potatoes’ of reproductive management, in addition to a diverse offering of other issues and new technologies related to dairy management.”

Matt added, “DCRC’s future looks bright, given the passion, drive and forward-thinking attitudes of DCRC members and leaders. The challenge moving forward is to maintain the quality of what we have and to go beyond that into other areas of dairy management that go along with making pregnancies and maintaining them. I also envision DCRC stretching its wings beyond synch protocol sheets and an annual meeting. We can offer more to members. The webinar series over the last couple of years is one example of that. Our current work on a new strategic plan will help us achieve our goals. I look forward to the expansion of DCRC’s member offerings – nationally and internationally.”

DCRC Webinar Series

Mark your calendars for the Dairy Cattle Reproduction Council’s 2018 webinar series. These highly regarded sessions offer attendees from across the United States and around the world access to high-quality information and interaction with industry experts from the comfort of their farm or office.

The webinars feature top-rated topics from previous DCRC Annual Meetings, as well as other areas of reproductive importance. Like last year, DCRC will offer a webinar in Spanish and one in Portuguese. Each webinar begins at 1 p.m. U.S. Central Time. We look forward to you joining us!

Save these dates:

  • Julio Giordano, Impact of Voluntary Waiting Period Duration on the Reproductive Performance and Profitability (Sponsored by Merck), October 25, 2018, at 1 p.m. Central Time. Register here.
  • Pablo Pinedo (Spanish Webinar), Rasgos genómicos asociados con la fertilidad de las vacas lecheras (Genomic Traits Associated with the Fertility of Dairy Cows), December 19, 2018, at 1 p.m. Central Time. Register here.

To register for a webinar, please visit Webinars and follow all prompts. As the webinar approaches, you will receive an e-mail with information on how to log in for attendance.

Each 2018 DCRC webinar provides one American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists (ARPAS) continuing education unit (CEU). To report ARPAS CEUs, go to: www.arpas.org/Membership/CEUs/Report-CEUs.

For more information, e-mail Fabio Lima, DCRC Education Committee chair, at: flima@illinois.edu or e-mail DCRC at: dcrc@dcrcouncil.org.

If you are a DCRC member and cannot attend the “live” webinar, you may access it (and all past webinars) at dcrcouncil.org.

Industry Calendar