Health… welfare… planet

“So often, at beef producer meetings, I hear people say that we need to educate the public about agriculture,” says Mike McMorris, CEO of the Ontario-based Livestock Research Innovation Corporation (LRIC). “But most consumers don’t want to be educated. They want to trust that the system functions to the highest standard. Trust being the key word.”

Animal-free protein products

Instead, in polls on why consumers find alternative proteins appealing, the answers (rightly or wrongly) focus on better human health, animal welfare and environmental health. Gaudy headlines promising Armageddon should agriculture continue in its current direction don’t help.

“That’s a pretty clear signal that people think livestock products are not better. Every producer should ask themselves how they are progressing on those three issues,” warns McMorris.

However, those issues are “wicked problems” that take time and resources, and on which the livestock sector will have to collaborate with a wide range of players (such as researchers, economists, nutritionists, veterinarians, consumers, environmentalists). To add another layer of complexity, the issues are tied to other wicked problems that may not even be on most people’s radar. McMorris and LRIC have developed a webinar and white paper on each one that we at Gentec encourage our community to check out. We also provide the potted version below.

The impacts of livestock on climate change and soil health

Globally, agriculture uses about 70% of all water withdrawn from renewable fresh water sources. The livestock industry consumes water mostly for drinking, out of which we get products such as milk, eggs and meat—and products such as urine and manure, which must be managed because they may degrade freshwater systems in several ways (E. coli, etc.) when released. Livestock are also a source of greenhouse gas emissions in the form of manure, and methane released through belching, although not to the extent you hear in the media.

“Don’t just read the headlines,” fulminates McMorris. “You’ll get the wrong story or be confused. You have to understand the context behind the numbers.”

In Canada, for example, 80% of beef cattle live most of their lives on the range and drink rainwater. In Alberta especially, they contribute to controlling invasive species on the Prairies, one of the most endangered ecosystems. That’s very different from raising livestock intensively in a feedlot—in Alberta or anywhere else—where water needs will be higher but, in the case of Australian lamb, still not affect freshwater supplies.

“For producers, knowing that each individual operation has an impact, they can find the counterpoints,” argues McMorris. “Cows burp? Yes, but they also turn unusable land into a nutritious protein for humans. Everybody’s looking for the simple answer. It’s always more nuanced.”

In his best-selling book, The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell explains how ideas spread like epidemics, little noticed until exponential growth hits a point of rapid change… and then things seem unstoppable. McMorris fears that “livestock = bad” is approaching that tipping point.

“Most consumers are generations removed from the farm, and don’t discriminate between beef cows and laying hens,” he laments. “It’s all just ‘animal agriculture’. The media often present a wrong, incomplete or biased context. The only way to avoid that is for ag groups to be proactive and collaborative in getting out messages about what we’re doing on the health, welfare and planet issues that matter to consumers.”

AMR: Antimicrobial resistance (taking a new One Health approach) and zoonoses

In Canada, 75% of antibiotics are used in animals, of which a small percentage involves pharmaceuticals of importance to humans. Canadian pharmacies and hospitals gave out 250,000 kg of antibiotics in 2016 alone. Because antibiotics are so widely used, they no longer always kill common bacteria. These resistant bacteria travel through lakes, rivers, ditches, water treatment plants, soil and landfill sites through the food chain and up to humans.

“Again,” says, McMorris, “context matters, so read deeper than the headlines. In dairy and poultry, where supply management regulates the price of the product, farmers normally work with their veterinarian and a herd health plan. Other sectors, like beef, respond to various external pressures so they are more cost conscious. The vet is as an expense.”

McMorris recommends that beef producers understand the bigger picture surrounding AMR, that they track their use of antibiotics, dispose of excess product safely, and follow the treatment according to the label and the vet.

AMR is the quintessential wicked problem that binds us all together. Although some consumers are willing to pay a small premium for products that are certified “raised without antibiotics,” thinking they are helping with AMR, few realize that withholding antibiotics from sick animals is a terrible welfare strategy, putting the whole herd, and ultimately humans too, at risk of infection. Good intentions don’t cut it.

One of the great fears is that some bacteria will eventually resist even the most powerful antibiotics reserved for human use. Should that happen, we can expect more animal-to-human and human-to-animal transfer of disease (zoonoses). COVID-19 is the mother of all zoonoses (so far); others include rabies, salmonella, Ebola, encephalitis from ticks and Lyme disease.

Part of the answer lies in the JUDICIOUS use of antibiotics, which requires compromise by all parties. Another part lies in thinking globally. As COVID-19 has taught us, variants can appear anywhere, at any time. Being vaccinated in Canada isn’t enough. All the world’s citizens need to be vaccinated for the response to be effective. It’s the same on the farm, especially since animals and products move around a lot and are exported. Producers must have thorough biosecurity that includes people, family and pets as well as the more obvious delivery trucks, feed and farm machinery.

Genetics

Humans have used genetics in agriculture from its earliest days to create products they want; the development of corn from a weedy grass into the powerhouse we know today is good example. Whereas breeding used to be done by “eye”, now we have technology, databases and tools such as CRISPR to help out. The rationale is still the same: deliver affordable, nutritious food to 7.8 billion hungry mouths.

Genetics has made incredible differences to the dairy sector. For example, milk yields have increased, butterfat has increased and decreased according to demand, polled (hornless) cows have improved farm safety and reduced injuries. The beef sector has not benefitted from genetics to the same extent. Cow calf producers are interested in the longevity of the cow, a live calf on the ground every year. Feedlot producers want daily gain, marbling; and packers want a big carcass. And consumers want low cost, sustainable production and good animal welfare. The Canadian Beef Improvement Network (CBIN) was launched to help derive the benefits of genetics for the entire beef supply chain, always with a key focus on the consumer.

The Gene: An intimate history should be required reading,” says McMorris. “It’s about mankind’s understanding of genetics from 5,000 years ago to today with some thoughts about the future. Today, genetic technologies are incredibly powerful, and we all need some understanding to develop well thought-out positions on what parts of it we will and will not use—in humans and in agriculture. Right now, there are a lot of uninformed people with strong opinions.”

Many years ago, a staff member at the Elora Beef Research Station told McMorris that, given a chance to start over, he’d take Psychology at university instead of Animal Science because he finally realized that when you get out into the world and see how things work, it’s all about people.

“That’s why, on genetics and all the other Big Things, the livestock sector needs consistent, informed, collaborative messaging. Because we have to connect with people.”

 

“We all need to change a little bit,” concludes McMorris. “Life is changing fast. We can be part of that change and help to create the future—or risk becoming a victim of what others decide.”

Gentec at AgSmart: Summary and insight

The theme of the 2nd annual AgSmart agricultural education event hosted by Olds College on August 10-11, 2021 was Growing Profits With Data, which served as an excellent opportunity to demonstrate the entrepreneurial start-ups poised to shape Alberta’s agricultural industry as well as the technological advances and Smart Farm concepts used to train the next generation of producers.

Gentec staff weren’t the only ones eager to interact with the world again. Despite mixed weather, over 1,000 attendees made the trip to attend one of the 96 sessions, stop by one of the more than 100 exhibitors or visit one of the many food trucks and catch up with the many others who share a common interest in agriculture.

Perhaps the most surprising revelation of the event was the breadth and variety of expertise in attendance. Sessions ranged from how information management systems could be used to improve relations with your banker; an organic bio-stimulant venture hosting and collecting the “excrement” (their term) of 17 million earthworms to use as the perfect plant food; a camera company using artificial intelligence and facial recognition to monitor herd welfare; and of course—the benefits of DNA applications. Speaking of which…

Dr. John Basarab, Gentec’s new Head of Beef Operations, led a session on the value that genomics tools can deliver to beef producers and emerging tools for the commercial beef producer. The session introduced two new tools targeting the commercial beef producer that have been developed as part of our ongoing research and proprietary databases of Alberta beef herds: the Feeder Profit Index and the Replacement Heifer index. A more thorough review of the presentation and how it aligns with the Canadian Beef Strategy can be found here.

John was joined by Cameron Olson and Lisa McKeown who helped host our live-animal Efficient Heifer Competition. Each hosted several information sessions featuring 6 of the most attractive heifers many in the audience had ever seen. The take-away message was that true beauty is more than skin deep—in this case, genomic deep—since the session highlighted the economic benefits of hybrid vigour in terms of fertility and low residual feed intake, which are invisible to the naked eye.

And what could be more beautiful than the ability to select a feed-efficient, fertile heifer with a greater statistical likelihood of producing a healthy calf year in and year out? Following the presentation, attendees were encouraged to stop by the Gentec booth to enter their newly-informed guess in the competition, with one correct contestant to win a prize.

At the Gentec booth, the team (Kira MacMillan, Clinton Brons, Gentec CEO Graham Plastow and Board Chair David Andrews) were delighted to meet so many interested delegates, new faces and old friends. Traffic at the booth was continual during the event, allowing us to connect with new producers who just happened to pass by, joined by those who specifically sought us out as a result of John’s presentation (above) or to enter the Efficient Heifer Competition. We were delighted that Jennifer Stewart-Smith (Beefbooster CEO) joined the team on both days to help introduce the “arm-chair rancher” project as well as taking in some of the other exhibits.

Gentec had the opportunity to say Thank You to a number of individuals and organizations who have enabled our mission to support the beef industry over the years. Thus, we were pleased to host special guests including Cherie Copithorne-Barnes, the Hon. Dan and Kathy Hays, William Torres from Vytelle (formerly GrowSafe), Doug Wray, the Foothills Forage and Grazing Association, and Joe Lofthouse from Highway 21 Feeders.

Phil Norregaard and his son Mark attended on behalf of Foothills Forage Association. Mark turned out to win the Efficient Heifer Competition, which resulted in a visit from Gentec at their Twin Lakes Ranch to deliver the grand prize of a Weber Smokey Mountain Cooker.

 

Gentec tools bring value to producers

Most groups that produce breeding values, genomically-enhanced or not, assume they work in practice but this isn’t always true. Results depend on the reference population being used. For example, purebred associations use databases of mostly purebred animals—but those reference populations are used mostly to produce commercial crossbred replacement or feeder cattle. Those databases don’t contain many crossbred animals.

“Gentec is different in that we built our database from crossbred animals in Western Canada,” says John Basarab, Gentec’s Head of Beef Operations. “So, our MBVs are exactly for the animals that are going to be the end product.”

The MBVs are created from a training database; then independently evaluated from another database of 2,268 commercial cattle that is kept aside for that purpose. Now, Gentec has MBVs for multiple traits, such as post-weaning growth, body weight, feed intake and feed efficiency, and carcass weight, yield grade, grade fat thickness, ribeye area, marbling, and lean meat yield. In short, the MBVs validate very well.

“But you don’t just pick one trait when you’re selecting bulls and replacement heifers for breeding,” Basarab points out. “You put all the traits you want—hopefully, the most economically-important ones!—together in a multitrait selection index. Gentec has produced two of these indexes: a Feeder Profit Index and a Replacement Heifer Profit Index for selecting heifers that are fertile, live a long time in the herd, and produce a calf every year (hybrid vigour).”

But… from the producer’s point of view, if you’re using DNA technology, you also have to buy DNA testing. That’s a hair sample from each animal that gets genotyped. The cost, about $35/sample, is manageable on a small scale. If you have 1,000 head, $35,000 is a big investment.

“We’re looking at DNA pooling to bring down the cost by about 90%,” says Basarab. “That’s a low-cost way of improving the hybrid vigour of the herd. Hybrid vigour is highly related to fertility, longevity, health resilience, and a lower carbon footprint—all highly desirable.”

So how does that work? At the lab, 50 hair samples are pooled into one big sample, which gets tested. The one genotype reveals the breed composition of the pool and its average hybrid vigour. A low score shows that only a few breeds are being used, hybrid vigour is low, and the producer would do well to introduce a new breed. At this level, producers can dip their toe into genotyping at a low cost and find out some interesting characteristics of their herd. For example, if two sires were in the mating group, you can know if one has been busier than the other, and then start matching group-level characteristics with pregnancy rate, calving rate or age at first calving.

“We think all three tools are going to be extremely useful for producers,” concludes Basarab. “Already, we have large-scale producers interested in the DNA pooling, and we have a project approved by RDAR. In fact, it was those large-scale producers who pressured us to research this area because the investment was too much. So, instead of $35,000… how does a few thousand sound?”

John Basarab, Gentec’s Head of Beef Operations, will be presenting on these tools at AgSmart Olds on August 10-11. Register for the conference here.

 

The Beef Improvement Federation (BIF): Why Everyone interested in beef genetics and technology should attend

By Kajal Devani
Director of Science and Technology
Canadian Angus Association

The Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) symposium is an annual convention that brings together beef researchers, technology providers, extension specialist, graduate students of beef genetics, and primary beef producers. Typically held in June, the convention rotates across US states, and has also been held in Calgary, Canada. In fact, BIF 2023 is scheduled to be held in Calgary just prior to the 2023 Calgary Stampede. The convention is a great way to advance the Federation’s mandate to connect science and industry to improve beef cattle genetics.

One of BIF’s objectives has been to standardize all performance records across beef breeds nationally and internationally. The BIF-recommended guidelines for performance recording provide beef breed associations, industry partners, and beef producers with a framework of economically-relevant traits to measure, and standardized methods and scoring guidelines for the traits. The Federation has responded as market and environmental changes pose opportunities and challenges to beef production industries. The annual BIF convention has become a place to discuss these, and explore possible solutions towards improvement in beef production with representation from multiple sectors of the industry as well as scientific researchers and technology providers.

Previous BIF conventions addressed topics ranging from fertility (estrus synchronization, timed-AI, sexed semen, genetic correlations of scrotal circumference to other traits) to consumer demands (beef production as a consumer-driven business; who is our consumer; what do they want today and 20 years from now; the genetics of meat science; and what can we do to improve the palatability of beef). The annual BIF convention has become a place to learn from the experiences of other livestock species and from beef production practices of other countries. For example, Dr. Mark Trotter from Central Queensland University shared Australia’s experience of adopting GPS-equipped tags to monitor location, movement, and health of Australian beef cattle in 2019. This technology (editor – coming to the UAlberta Roy Berg Kinsella Ranch soon) was novel at the time, and it was exciting to see in practice its possibilities and advantages.

This year, the 53rd BIF Symposium and Convention was held physically in Des Moines, Iowa, and made available virtually to those who were not able to travel due to global COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. It has been a year of increased awareness and appreciation for genetic tools and technology as the world charges forward with polarizing views on mRNA vaccines, alternative beef sources, and gene-edited livestock and aquaculture species. BIF convention participants follow advancements in gene editing in cattle closely. Dr. Alison Van Eenennaam has continually reported her lab’s progress in this field at BIF. The first two traits gene edited by Dr. Van Eenennaam’s lab were horns and sex, both edited to increase animal health and welfare and decrease the industry’s environmental footprint. Participants at BIF convention 2021 discussed at length possible ways to address that 46% of US consumers surveyed said that they would not eat meat from a gene-edited animal. Another trait that has significant impact on the industry’s environmental footprint, and on producer profitability, is fertility. This year, BIF convention participants heard from Dr. Francisco Peñagaricano’s lab on genes and biological pathways that contribute towards male fertility. Beef production is complex, and genetics play a significant role in the success of beef production from conception to the consumer experience. Genetic improvement is often a good solution for production challenges as genetic improvement can be long-lasting and cost-effective.

Central to the BIF mandate to promote genetic improvement in BIF, the convention typically includes lengthy discussions on genetic evaluations, advances in methodology and trait definition, and challenges for which we may or may not find a solution. This was particularly valuable when beef industries started incorporating genomics technology into genetic evaluations, and again when the methodology for this was refined from a multistep method to a single-step genetic evaluation. For several years, multiple scientific groups presented background information on genomics technology and updated BIF convention participants on the advances being made in these fields. This gave extension specialists, breed association technical staff (such as me), and producers the opportunity to ask questions and to provide feedback and direction to the scientists dedicated to developing tools for the industry. This is an ongoing discussion as genomics technology is advancing so fast. At the BIF convention, we can learn from the early adopters who share their experiences.

I have had the incredible opportunity to attend the annual BIF convention since 2010. As the Director of Science and Technology for the Canadian Angus Association, I have appreciated the opportunity to keep abreast of new tools for the beef industry, to learn about genetic evaluations and genetic selection tools and application, and to have an extensive network of scientists, extension specialists, and primary beef producers who have dedicated themselves to genetic improvement in beef cattle to learn from.

Event report: Animal Science Genetics and Genomics Network (ASGGN) Discussion Forum

by Ghader Manafiazar; assistant professor at Dalhousie University

The Animal Science Genetics and Genomics Network (ASGGN) Discussion Forum was held online on June 2, 2021. It offers a forum and environment in which scientists from all over the world can share information and data relating to breeding to mitigate methane (CH4) emissions from grazing livestock. The theme of the discussion this year was potential proxies of ruminants’ methane emissions. I was invited to speak about our work on the fecal methanogen species and methane production and forage intake from grazing beef heifers. It was encouraging to have a discussion with others working in the field and share new results and approaches, for example, the pros and cons of using fecal samples to estimate methane production.

It was really useful to participate. I learned about several potential proxies, such as microbiome profiles, that might be used to predict methane production in ruminants. It appears that the microbiome is comparable to other proxies. I also learned that volatile fatty acids could be used to rank sheep based on their CH4 yield. It was interesting to see the results of ongoing research on measuring rumen volumes in sheep by CT scanning, with the potential of selecting animals for lower methane production. Still, research using proxies to predict methane emission in animals is preliminary so a systematic review is needed of the available publications from which to make practical recommendations.

It was also great to see some Gentec friends among the speakers, including Dr. Rainer Roehe from Scotland’s Rural College, Dr. Suzanne Rowe from New Zealand AgResearch, and Dr. Filippo Miglior from the UoGuelph. Dr. Miligor talked about Canadian efforts to decrease methane emissions in dairy cattle. This project was a great collaborativeeffort between the UoGuelph, Gentec, and many international partners. This effort to improve the profitability and sustainability of the dairy industry is continuing with another Genome Canada-supported project led by Christine Baes at Guelph.

The Discussion Forum has a single focus: methane emissions. I recommend it for researchers working in methane mitigation. I may not be able to implement my learning at the farm level soon since research in this area is ongoing but, given today’s environmental concerns, I see there are new applications and adoption in the next decade. I am looking forward to being involved in my new position at Dalhousie including continued collaboration with the Gentec team.

Who is Kira Macmillan? Gentec’s new extension specialist

Born and raised in Edmonton, AB, I got my BSc in Animal Health Sciences and my MSc in Ruminant Nutrition from the UAlberta. Since 2016, I worked as a research technician for Dr. Marcos Colazo, first at Alberta Agriculture and Forestry and then at UAlberta. We conducted research projects on dairy and beef commercial farms, focusing on reproduction and health (see publications here). Our most recent project compared the economic performance of an automated activity monitor to a timed-AI protocol in dairy heifers on a commercial farm. My own research interests revolve around improving on-farm efficiency, in particular, adopting technologies and best management practices to increase reproductive performance.

I have also been contracting for Alberta Milk since 2015, starting out in research extension writing (DRECA research summaries). I was involved in extension event-planning (DRECA workshops), developing resources for producers and supporting administration of the proAction consumer assurance program in Alberta. In 2020, UAlberta asked me to help coordinate the first virtual Western Canadian Dairy Seminar that took place in March 2021. In short, I like to keep busy. In my spare (!) time, I love to travel (when it was allowed), and have been to 16 countries on 5 continents. At home, you can find me at the dog park or drinking craft beer.

As of April 1, 2021, I have a new role at Gentec as a communications and extension specialist. I have already jumped onto a couple of exciting projects and am looking forward to focusing on research extension. The first project is a collaboration between UAlberta and an industry group led by Beefbooster to create an app that will use machine learning to generate scenarios, predictions and recommendations for beef producers. My second project is coordinating Gentec’s presence at AgSmart Olds on Aug. 10-11, where we aim to connect with producers and introduce some of our new genomic selection indices for commercial cattle. I believe that one of the most important steps in the research process is communicating results and the value to the end users, producers. So, it’s essential that we keep producers in mind during research projects, and certainly after projects are completed to make sure those solutions or technology or products create a more efficient, profitable and sustainable industry.

I am thrilled to join the Gentec team, to get to know the beef industry better and to start engaging with producers in Alberta. I hope to help bridge the gap between research and producers to ensure they drive the direction of research and realize the full value of what research has to offer for their farms.

Anybody who wants to start talking, please contact me.

John Basarab: new Head of Beef Operations at Gentec

John Basarab chatted with Gentec about his new position as Head of Beef Operations. The highlights of that conversation are below.

Gentec: What’s the background to your move to Gentec/UAlberta after 30+ years with the Alberta government?

Basarab: Well, the story goes back several years. With Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, I built a successful research program in beef production, management, genetics and genomics. During a lot of that time, I was an adjunct professor at UAlberta as well, and involved in the Alberta Bovine Genome Program, led by Steve Moore. When feed efficiency became a big thing in Alberta and Australia in the early 2000s, my program became the phenotyping arm for feed efficiency, growth and carcass traits for the Program, which morphed into Gentec. (More recently, female fertility and longevity, and impacts on methane emissions have been added to the phenotypes for genetic/genomic analyses.)

Then, last year, Alberta Agriculture and Forestry changed its focus away from performing research towards funding research. Some programs, like mine, were transferred to UAlberta where I was appointed to a senior role to help strengthen research and discovery at the Faculty to help deliver tangible benefits for farmers. That’s how I—and some resources and phenotyping tech support—ended up at the University. It’s a good marriage.

Gentec: So, do you work for UAlberta or Gentec?

Basarab: Like the other lead Gentec scientists, I’m hired by the University. Others are hired by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada or other academic institutions. Gentec is a group of like-minded people collaborating on projects in animal genomics, phenomics and business. It relies on that likemindedness to advance its strategic plan, which is highly related to the beef industry’s strategic plan. That’s how we were able to put together a large tech transfer project for the beef industry (see EnVigour HX ™) and get it funded. In any year, Gentec carries projects worth over $25 million.

Gentec: So, you could have gone anywhere. Why Gentec?

Basarab. Gentec is a mechanism like few others for coordinating research and technology transfer activities. It’s almost like picking an all-star team. Gentec’s model is to say: we need good beef genomics and knowledge translation people. Where can we find them, and how do we get them to collaborate? The answer is: get them to buy into group values and objectives, and engage them on a project to fulfil industry needs.

Gentec: Did the funding from Alberta Innovates and Results-Driven Agriculture Research (RDAR) come with your move or was it coincidental?

Basarab: The project model is a good one but hard to sustain because we have to chase funds to retain basic staff, and generate some revenue. We’re good at generating ideas and winning grants. Then the IP gets developed and licensed out. Then we’re back to square one. Gentec’s new strategic plan reflects a change in direction, encouraging us to generate enough revenue to move forward, to deliver tools to producers that improve their bottom line and that are easier to use. So, these two tranches of funding coincided with my arrival—but I do bring the industry focus they’re looking for. RDAR, especially, is looking for solutions to industry challenges.

Gentec: Your title is Head of Beef Operations. What does that mean? What is your role?

Basarab: Well, the main thing is to implement the strategic plan, especially as it relates to the beef industry. So that means identify research, communication and extension activities that focus on industry challenges. Then go after funding. We’re doing a lot of that already. Several projects have been approved or are in the final round of competition.

We’ll capitalize on our deep relationships with the beef industry to solve industry challenges, and not just through genomics. We’ll look at emerging, data-driven technologies, like the smart farm, and develop software and analytics so that real-time data collection informs real-time decisions to benefit producers.

We’ll deepen our relationships with organizations like the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC), Canadian Beef Breeds Council, and the Canadian Beef Improvement Network to keep the research moving forward along industry lines. A key guidance document is the BCRC 2018-2023 Strategic Plan, which focuses on enhanced feed and forage production, improving feed efficiency, decreasing impacts on animal health, improving consumer confidence in beef and environmental sustainability. Several of these areas, like improving feed and production efficiency, optimizing carcass cut-out value and reducing the carbon footprint of beef production lend themselves well to genetic and genomic selection.

And, of course, we can never stop thinking about the research. All the above will come together to provide a rich learning environment and 360-degree industry awareness that attracts grad students who have a strong interest in agriculture and want to stay in Alberta and Canada. And I’m sure that the new research chair (Dr. Gleise da Silva) will collaborate with Gentec, UAlberta and AAFC researchers, tech transfer staff and industry.

Gentec: What excites you about the next steps for Gentec?

Basarab: We have this great genomic-phenomic dataset—unique to Canada in beef cattle—that now allows us to generate all sorts of genomics tools for the beef industry. Those tools will work because the database has been created from cattle in Western Canada. These are homegrown genotypes and phenotypes from our own backyard. I’m so excited about bring these solutions to our beef industry.

CAPI Big Solutions Forum: Creating Prosperity from Chaos

At the Big Solutions Forum on May 20, 2021, the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute brought together government and industry experts to discuss “how to build a resilient, sustainable and prosperous argi-food system for Canada”. The Forum was held to synthesize results from the year-old research program Creating Prosperity from Chaos, which originally referred to disruptions in global trade, sustainability and food security but was re-focused when the COVID 19 pandemic began.

Based on their research results, CAPI concluded the “Canadian agri-food system has great potential and capacity to contribute to sustainable food production, global food security and climate solutions while improving its competitive advantage”. Their results identified four key actions:

  • Systems approach – improve coordination between all stakeholders in the agri-food system to generate strategies to maximize sustainability;
  • Strategic thinking – better leverage Canada’s comparative advantages and assets to drive the agri-food system forward;
  • Public-private partnerships – expand collaborative partnerships to address barriers to the agri-food system and promote a resilient and adaptable system;
  • Aspirational leadership – to promote proactive strategies to create a successful agri-food system in the future.

In the first panel, Chris Forbes (DM AAFC), Simon Kennedy (DM Innovation, Science and Economic Development), Christine Hogan (DM Environment and Climate Change), Dr. Harpreet Kiochhar (DM Health Canada), and John Hannaford (DM International Trade) addressed how the federal government views the challenges and opportunities for Canada’s agri-food system. In the aftermath of the COVID 19 pandemic, Canada’s agri-food system showed itself to be resilient with minimal disruptions to the food supply chain. The economic pressure created by the pandemic also highlighted issues and opportunities. The big issues identified included environmental sustainability, inclusion, and the need to focus on a “One Health” approach in research and regulation. Opportunities that arose were the sky-rocketing rates of digital adoption and the innovation and collaboration across the sector. Canada has a competitive advantage in terms of environment policies, carbon use and food security, which creates a strong foundation moving forward.

In the second panel, Bill Greuel (Protein Industries Canada), Bettina Hamelin (Ontario Genomics), Chris Terris (Telus Agriculture Canada), Gaétan Desroches (Sollio Cooperative Group), and Katelyn Duncan (Backswath Management) discussed private industries role in the moving Canada’s agri-food system forward. The system is ripe for digitization, technology adoption and creating value-added solutions to improve efficiency, sustainability and economic viability. With all the crises the world faces (COVID 19, climate change and anti-microbial resistance, and others) collaboration has never been more important. Private industry needs to adopt more of a “coopetition” outlook, working together to create an outcome where competition can thrive. In science, the lines between disciplines and sectors are blurring more with the One Health approach. This allows for technology to converge to create value added opportunities.

Across all sectors and value chains, the CAPI Forum was a call to action for collaboration and systems thinking to drive the competitiveness and sustainability of Canada’s agri0food system.

Gene Editing: what should the public know

By Ellen Goddard

Perhaps you have heard of gene editing (genome editing) in the news? Particularly the best-known approach, which is CRISPR-Cas9?

In 2020, Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their discovery and development of the technology. Wikipedia defines gene editing as a type of genetic engineering in which DNA is inserted, deleted, modified or replaced in the genome of a living organism. Many of the practical applications have aimed to delete genes that lead to disease in plants, animals or humans. One example is the ability to gene-edit pigs to be completely resistant to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS), the most economically-important disease of pigs in North America, Europe and Asia, costing producers in North America more than $600 million annually. (Correspondence: Gene-edited pigs are protected from porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, 2016, Nature Biotechnology, Vol 34, No 1, pp 20-22).

CRISPR technology differs from earlier biotechnology applications, like genetic modification. Scientists speak to the fact that it is much more specific, and traits can be completely heritable by progeny from the edited animal. On the other hand, there are public concerns about how the decision to use the technology may be made – related to whether the technology is perceived to be interfering with nature. Scientists from a number of countries have called for a moratorium on gene-editing babies (Communication: Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing, Nature, 567, 165-168 (2019)).

At the heart of the issue at the moment is the role of the public in developing gene editing policies (Morgan Meyer (2020) The Fabric of the Public in Debates About Gene Editing, Environmental Communication, 14:7, 872-876, DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2020.1811477). People often assume that science alone should drive policy but this may discount public concerns and form resistance to the use of the technology. There is a growing recognition that public concerns about the use of certain technologies are valid in determining policy, and that not all public concerns can be dealt with purely by educating the public about the potential benefits of the technology. Like many other earlier technologies, CRISPR does come with the risk of some unintended consequences (Gene-edited hornless cattle: Flaws in the genome overlooked). But every development, including the development of the COVID-19 vaccines, comes with risks of unintended consequences. The main difference may be in how those unintended consequences are presented (or not presented) to the public. It is hard to put unintended consequences in context to make appropriate individual risk assessments if the use of the technology is not obvious (in some countries, gene-edited plant products are not required to be labelled although GMO plants are) and the potential unintended consequences are not made public and transparent.

To investigate Canadian public acceptance of the use of different technologies, national online surveys were conducted in 2019 and 2021. Previous research shows that the public strongly approves of the development of pigs (and other livestock) that can be bred to be more disease-resilient. This recent research showed exactly the same thing. What differed this time was follow-up questions asking respondents to identify the preferred technology to breed disease-resilient pigs. The options were conventional breeding (with its longer development time), using genomic information in selectively breeding pigs (which could be significantly faster than conventional breeding) and gene editing (the fastest method to change the disease susceptibility of farm and national pig populations). Although all methods were seen as positive, there were definite distinctions across technologies (Goddard, unpublished results). For example, consumers’ willingness to pay for pork from gene-edited pigs was 7% less than from conventionally-bred pigs. The use of genomics in selective breeding was only discounted by consumers by 3% over conventional breeding. These results may be because consumers are less familiar with the different technologies but equally may be driven by ethical considerations. One interesting result is that the more knowledgeable and satisfied respondents were with the way pigs are taken care of in Canadian agriculture, the more they supported increasing disease resilience by any means.

Given the changes associated with new and diverse technologies in agriculture to solve problems associated with disease, drought and other aspects of climate change, it may be beneficial to consider open and transparent disclosure of the technologies used and their associated potential consequences. On this basis the public can increase familiarity and potentially reduce deeply held risk perceptions about the use of new technologies in food.

CRSB Panel Discussion: Using consumer research to understand sustainability drivers and motivations

At the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef’s semi-annual meeting, panelists Amie Peck (Canadian Cattlemen’s Association), Michael Young (Canada Beef), John Jamieson (Canadian Centre for Food Integrity), and Clay Holmes (InterCity Packers Meat and Seafood) provided some answers on what goes on in consumers’ heads when they think about beef.

As the food shortages in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic showed, Canadians turned to their kitchen in droves for feel-good meals. Website clicks on recipes and food prep skyrocketed. While people certainly indulged their sweet tooth, they also cleaned the shelves of beef products. The beef trend, at least, looks like it’s here to stay. How can we capitalize on that?

Overall, Canadians trust the food system, and have a high positive impression of the beef industry. Beef is considered a high-quality product, and most Canadians are still eating at least “some”. Gen Z and millennials are more interested in how food is produced than previous generations, and willing to make purchasing changes based on how they perceive food items are produced. Millennials have a less positive view of the beef industry than previous generations, and feel more social pressure to avoid beef and/or choose what they believe are sustainable protein options. They tend to be skeptical but can be convinced by good information. This creates an opportunity to connect, dispel ideas around negative media content, and provide information to help them make nutritious choices.

Sustainability is a newer and growing point of discussion for the beef industry—but still not as important as cost, quality and safety. We are still in the early-adopter phase, with those consumers who want sustainable options willing to pay for it. After all, the cost of buying into sustainable certifications shouldn’t fall solely on the producers’ shoulders. Importantly, however, many consumers still don’t know that sustainable beef even is an option. And producers aren’t aware of the incentives to embark on this course. We need to communicate the beef message better to each group, and define what sustainability means instead of allowing the plant-based protein sector to drive the story. (As an aside, the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef won an award for its website on this very topic.) Consumers aren’t looking for perfection, but they do want to see effort and ongoing improvement. This is an opportunity to build more positive perceptions around feedlots, explain what they are and what their role is in the beef value chain.

Producers have the biggest role to play. These are the people consumers want to hear from. These are the people who can say they care about their animals and the environment, and that they are working to limit environmental impacts. We need to put a face on who ranchers are and what their values are.

These messages aren’t being heard well enough. Working on public trust needs to become part of the daily routine of producers to maintain that precious social licence. Some have hit social media incredibly successfully. Unfortunately, these are the pioneers not the norm.