Author Archive: Szenthe, Anna

Alberta’s Centennial Ranches strongly connected to Gentec

Posted on

Cherie is CEO of the vast CL Ranches located just outside Calgary’s western city limits. The ranch itself consists of seedstock and commercial cow/calf operations, a backgrounding lot and a large mixed-grain farming operation.

After graduating from the Texas Christian University Ranch Management Program, Cherie managed an 11,000-cow beef operation in Uruguay, selling beef directly into Canada and the EU. Her time in Uruguay also exposed her to the packing industry through an investment into an 850-head capacity packing plant. Most importantly, Cherie is the mother of the 5th generation of ranchers at CL Ranches, and as such, dedicates much of her time to defining what sustainability will mean to them. Towards this end, Cherie has been generous with her time providing her expertise and leadership through participation in the following initiatives, to name a few:

  • WA Ranch Advisor Member – University of Calgary
  • Advisory Board Member of Strategic Engagement Group, Olds College
  • Advisory Member Rangeland Research Institute – University of Alberta
  • Executive Committee Member – Canadian Beef Improvement Network
  • Sendero – Director & Co-Founder
  • Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef – Executive Officer
  • Canadian Cattlemen’s Young Leaders -Mentor
  • Calgary Stampede – Board of Directors
  • Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency (ALMA) – Interim Chair & Executive Committee Member
  • Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (CRSB) – Chair
  • Calgary Stampede – Chair Agri-Food

She speaks affectionately of the sustainability of the operation and the resiliency of the cattle. Upon hearing her story, it is easy to infer that these are also the traits the family has had to exhibit to advance the ranch into its current, 4th generation of stewardship.

The genesis of the ranch stretches back to 1887 when brothers Richard and John Copithorne arrived in Canada from Cork, Ireland. They established a homestead, and began a new life raising cattle along the Jumping Pound Creek under the Lazy J brand. It was also here that they built the foundations of an operation that paved the way for Richard to register is own independent CL brand in 1895. One hundred and twenty-six years later, Cherie is leading it through its 4th generation and working hard to hand it off to the 5th in even better condition than she inherited it.

Although the entrepreneurial spirit may be the same, the operation has morphed from a range herd of Durham cattle that saw the brothers survive hard times, in part through bartering butter, into to a sophisticated operation—but one that still uses all the resources available to grow and sustain the legacy.

To this end, Cherie and her team capitalize on the abundance of gravel on their property; partner with a local outfitter to allow hunting on their land; and undertake land development initiatives. There is even a complete Hollywood filmset featuring scenes from the 1850s through to 1940 on the property.  As any cowgirl will grimace, “Cows can’t pay all the bills!”

As in any industry, progress occurs and the innovations of the day are adopted to stay competitive. The Durham cattle gave way to horned Herefords. Later, the “heresy” of crossbred cattle entered the fray – in Alberta, this occurred through the pioneering work of Roy Berg and as a result of enterprising ranchers willing to try out “what seemed to work” as opposed to blind orthodoxy. Other advances pursued over the years included becoming an early adopter of artificial insemination technology and an intense selection for the maternal characteristics that still characterize the herd. As for the latter, much of this work was done through collaboration with the Beefbooster system led by John Stewart-Smith. Through the years, CL Ranches has been an early and continual adopter of this science, exhibiting a curiosity and habit of applied experimentation that still exists today.

Today’s herd has been developed around the (still evolving) CL SuperCross seedstock cattle breeding program, and employs any and all tools that deliver practical results. This means pursuing a balanced approach focused on optimizing the herd as opposed to maximizing any single characteristic. Here, everyone is expected to work hard. The cows must be efficient and raise a strong calf every year—and not in not the easiest of conditions (Alberta!). Calves are expected to maintain a high and efficient-post weaning gain, and their beef to be tender, of high yield, abundant marbling, and great taste.

“At the end of the day,” says Cherie. “If we want to thrive, our cows have to deliver for us, for our customers, and ultimately our customer’s customer”.

Included in this is the belief that you can only manage what you measure. SuperCross cattle must perform on a 40-45 day breeding interval (still in Alberta), demonstrate conception rates well in excess of 90%, and deliver on pounds of weaned calf per cow in the fall.

This is why we at Gentec are so excited to have Cherie join our Management Advisory Board. As stated by Chair David Andrews, “If you look at the priorities of CL Ranches, they overlay almost perfectly with the performance metrics established for Gentec over the next 5 years. Cherie’s ranch and management is as good as it gets. She wakes up every morning thinking about exactly the same mandate as we do; she is exceptionally well connected within the industry through a lifetime of ranching, industry leadership, and boots-on-the-ground practicality that resonates with other producers. We need that to succeed and that is why we are so excited to have her and Sean, joining the MAB.”

Cherie concurs. The adventure is not over. The future of breeding cattle lies in finding profitability through the predictability of an animal’s performance within all segments of the beef value chain. CL Ranches is also a founding investor in Sendero Limited, a company that focuses on bringing together like-minded producers, feeders (and one day possibly even packers) to make this a reality.

“We want to create a value chain that improves and optimizes the genetic merit of the cattle,” says Cherie. “This is done through genetics and by improving the management practices used in the environments that produce them. To do this, phenotypic and genotypic information needs to be collected, analyzed, and result in better combinations of cow, environment and management.”

As the saying goes, if you actually want to get something done, ask a busy person. How does Cherie respond?

“I am honoured to be a part of the MAB. Gentec is a world leader when it comes to innovation, and I look forward to contributing to this journey of continual improvement for Canada’s beef industry.”

“Made in Alberta by Albertans”

Posted on

Alberta’s Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry announced in July that local produce could soon carry a little sticker with these very words.

This label, which can be used throughout the food system—farmer’s markets, grocery stores and restaurants, for example—will be a key piece of information generated by producers to communicate the evidence in which they are highly interested. There are a variety of reasons for consumer interest in local food, such as freshness and a sincere desire to support local producers.

It is worth mentioning that other provinces have similar programs. For example, Foodland Ontario has been around since 1977, and BC reintroduced a Buy BC program in 2018 after an almost ten years hiatus.

Do these programs benefit producers and consumers? Most research shows that that they are effective from the standpoint of consumer awareness and sales of products. For example, Foodland Ontario noted that over 90% of Ontario consumers are familiar with and value the Foodland Ontario logo. A benefit of using a common logo throughout the food system may be increased awareness of the range of foods produced in Alberta throughout the year.

Throughout the pandemic consumers have increased their demand for ‘local’ foods, partly in response to concerns about shortages but also through a desire to shorten the food supply chains… have fewer steps and fewer hands between producer and consumer. A 2021 AgriNovus report on the impact of the pandemic on Indiana agribusiness highlighted the increased importance of transparency and traceability to the future resilience of the sector. If consumers want ‘local’, they also want to know that ‘local’ is verified and can be traced through supply chains. This means an increased focus on traceability systems will naturally accompany the application of local food branding. The AgriNovus report highlighted the variety of technologies which can enhance traceability, including genetic tracing, block chain, near-field communication (NFC), radio-frequency identification (RFID) and the Internet of Things. These technologies can make the operation of multiple supply chains for identity-protected products more efficient and provide guarantees to customers and consumers. Whether buying local means visiting a u-pick, a farmers’ market or a supermarket, traceability can support a Made in Alberta by Albertans identification program.

A few years ago, we studied Canadian consumer interest in genetic or RFID traceability systems in pork. At that time, traceability back to farm of origin was highly valued by Canadian consumers, with a preference for the use of genetic traceability over RFID systems. It will be interesting to monitor the roll out of the Alberta program across commodities and to assess the role of genetic technology in enhancing the labelling/identification program. Research suggests that this use of genetic technology generates few concerns for the public.

REPORT: Trust in agri-food innovation in the face of decreasing public confidence

Posted on

On August 26, 2021, the Agri-food Innovation Council hosted a panel-based webinar to discuss factors contributing to the decreasing public trust in the food sector, implications for agri-food research and innovation, and recommendations to build public trust. The panelists were:

  • Dr. Jill E. Hobbs, Professor, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan
  • Mr. John Jamieson, President and CEO, Canadian Centre for Food Integrity
  • Dr. Jeff Kinder, Executive Director, Science and Innovation, Institute on Governance

Gentec attended this webinar so you don’t have to. We summarize below the panelists’ comments on the key points.

What is the current state of trust in the agri-food sector?

KINDER. Trust is higher than in the US but it’s a mixed bag right now, partly because of the pandemic. Governments put scientists front and centre in their communications with the public. But that highlighted that there’s a general misunderstanding of how science works, as shown in the public not understanding why the signals changed around wearing masks. And the pandemic also gave voice to anti-vaxxers. We see Canadians’ trust reflected in the Adelman Trust Barometer, which shows 83% of trust in scientists compared to only 43% who trust CEOs, business leaders and government. But the latest 3m survey cautions that 58% of respondents think scientists are elitist and 38% think they’re not as ethical as they should be.

HOBBS. The challenge occurs when drilling down to the context. Consumers trust some things but not others so the issue is more nuanced than just “trusting science.” Cultural, economic, social and other values are involved. In our research, we were surprised that 80% of people picked credible sources (Health Canada, traditional media, etc.) and science over consumer blog posts. That’s encouraging. We know there’s more trust of biotech in medicine than in agriculture. Why the difference?

JAMIESON. We saw a marked increase in support for the food system during the pandemic because it was able to pivot and continued to put product on store shelves. But I agree that, when we drill down, consumers are wary. When we look at GMOs and pesticide use, less than 50% of people support these. It’s interesting that we want technology in almost every facet of life—we don’t go to a doctor who uses leaches—but we also don’t recognize technology that creates better animal welfare and affordability. We know that Canadians are concerned with affordability so it’s interesting that they struggle with technologies that enable it. In our interviews of 3,000 Canadians, less than half say agriculture is heading in the right direction. It comes from a lack of knowledge. Ninety percent say they know little or nothing about agriculture. That’s not surprising. As people get farther away from the farm, they know less about processes and practices.

However, squeaky wheels in relation to social media and misinformation are major sources of concern. Social media has allowed everyone to have an opinion, not necessarily based on fact. And because of algorithms, there’s a bias in your social media feed. So if you happen to view something with negative connotations around GMOs, you will continue to see that. As a sector, we see that researchers are second only to farmers as the most trusted source of information, so if we can continue to cite sources, be open and transparent and use social media, we can advance from some pitfalls.

HOBBS. The way we make decisions is heuristics. With availability heuristics, we tend to use information that’s readily available and easy to digest. That’s what social media is about. Social media is not going away so we must engage creatively in terms of how people respond to different types of information.

KINDER. Food is special because it’s essential, so it hits close to home. It’s a dynamic we partake in every day but we don’t understand where it comes from because we’re removed from the farm. Plus, there’s skepticism around disruptive technology. Agri-food is not starting with a clean slate. Examples include rBGH, GMO, glyphosate, mad cow disease. They are not failures of science but of communication and transparency. So we have to deal with those failures.

How has the erosion of trust impacted researchers and consumers?

KINDER. It’s part of a broader concern about the erosion of the social contract. After World War II, society decided to continue funding science in peace time, and provided a certain autonomy in deciding funding and how to spend it. We continue to hear that scientists are in the best position to decide what counts as evidence but the post-trust reality may need a new approach and to rethink the social contract.

HOBBS. An additional dimension is that science must think about how to frame tech. For example, should we have given “food irradiation” a different name? The resemblance of the word to radiation and nuclear accidents freaks people out. Producer groups that fund applied research in agriculture and are a good source of communication play an important role, although their perspective is sometimes too narrow. For scientists, the incentives to communicate with the public aren’t built into the system. Whose role is it to communicate science? Not all consumers are concerned about agricultural technology—but is the vocal minority starting to shift policy?

JAMIESON. It has affected producers and shaken their confidence in what they do. You must be confident to do better. The sector has started to communicate the value of the technology to society, and increased the transparency in the sector. It prompted the industry to do better in terms of communications and framing. Gestation crates have a negative connotation but if you talk about maternity pens, suddenly, they are more acceptable. All of this will advance public trust.

Efforts are being made to increase trust in agri-food. What else could be done?

JAMIESON. The main thing to build trust is to have the industry communicate messages consistently and in unity. Don’t tear other parts of the industry down. The other side is doing the right thing and VERIFYING that you’re doing the right thing. Then communicate that. It sounds simple but it’s not. Being open and transparent does not mean being defensive. We might be scientists or producers but we’re all consumers as well. Communicating values is important because most of us have similar values.

I worked with AquaBounty, the company that has just brought GMO salmon to store shelves after 30 years because they had a difficult time getting the public to accept the benefits. One of the directors said,” We thought we had science on our side and that would be enough.” Of course, it wasn’t. That’s an important story. We’re doing a better job on communications. That’s how we will advance trust.

HOBBS. If there are issues, own your mistakes. There is always collateral damage because issues affect everybody, so work together to communicate better across the supply chain. We don’t always do that. People respond well to stories because they are easy to understand so we must tell stories that resonate with people.

KINDER. Communications with an “s” typically means a one-way broadcast model. Communication with no “s” is a multi-way dialogue. It’s listening as much as talking. Eighty-eight percent of 3M respondents want communication in plain language. Eighty-five percent want more results more often and 80% want them more relatable to everyday life. So we need to avoid the deficit model of communications that assumes the public are empty vessels that need to be filled.

Also, political, legal, cultural and other considerations need to be taken into consideration at the policy-making stage, not just scientific evidence. Science is just part of what goes into a policy decision.

Great wins for science communications in agri-food that won “hearts and minds” include Arctic apples.

What do we do next to avoid the erosion of trust?

KINDER. Bring the public in sooner in the discussion on agri-food. It will be messy but that’s where we need to go.

HOBBS. Nobody has a crystal ball, but keep communications transparent and stay ahead of the issues collectively.

JAMIESON. This is the mandate of the Centre. It boils down to doing the things we’re doing, understanding what people are thinking about, what’s important to them, then working on shared knowledge and shared values. It’s progress rather than perfection. It’s important to put ourselves in other people’s shoes. It’s only been 10-15 years since the system has thought about public trust. We’re getting better all the time.

Health… welfare… planet

Posted on

“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

Posted on

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

Posted on

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

Posted on

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

Posted on

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

Posted on

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

Posted on

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.