Advertise on podcast: Real Science Exchange-Dairy

This episode of Real Science Exchange was recorded live at the 2026 IPPE Show and focuses on the newly formalized IFEEDER Research Submission Program and its role in advancing innovation across the animal feed and pet food industries.  Lara Moody, Executive Director of the Institute for Feed Education and Research (IFEEDER), opens the discussion by outlining IFeeder’s mission to advance understanding and trust in a sustainable animal feed and pet food supply chain. Founded in 2009, IFEEDER has steadily expanded its scope of work, recently releasing key industry resources including feed ingredient consumption reports, a comprehensive pet food ingredient report covering more than 600 ingredients, and a strategic assessment of vitamins and amino acids related to U.S. food security. (0:46)  Lara then introduces Dr. Yan‑Tai Hung, IFeeder’s Senior Research Manager, whose background as a swine nutritionist brings additional technical depth to the organization’s research efforts. Dr. Hung discusses his experience in applied nutrition research and how IFEEDER is expanding beyond individual ingredients to address the broader animal food production chain and food availability challenges. (2:05)  The conversation turns to IFEEDER’s funding model and organizational growth, with Laura explaining how the foundation has diversified beyond industry funding alone. Over the past five years, IFeeder has shifted from relying almost entirely on industry contributions to securing significant support through grants and partnerships with organizations such as the USDA, commodity groups, and other stakeholders—allowing annual project funding to grow substantially. (3:24)  Dr. Chad Risley, Research Committee Chair, shares his long‑standing involvement with IFeeder and reflects on how the organization has evolved from early educational initiatives to a more focused, impact‑driven research foundation. He highlights the importance of IFEEDER’s sustainability toolkit and strategic planning in helping the organization gain momentum and relevance across the industry. (4:29)  A major focus of the episode is the new IFeeder Research Submission Program, which formalizes how research ideas move from concept to funded projects. Previously, projects originated informally through committees and the board. The new process provides clear submission guidelines and evaluation criteria to ensure proposed projects align with AFIA priorities and deliver practical value to the industry. (8:39)  The panel explains that while the submission process is newly approved, outreach is already underway with AFIA committees and industry stakeholders to encourage future submissions. With 14 AFIA committees representing diverse areas of animal nutrition, IFEEDER aims to ensure broad participation across the feed and pet food sectors. (11:28)  Dr. Risley discusses how IFEEDER‑supported research has already driven regulatory and policy wins, including data used to demonstrate the economic impact of delayed feed additive approvals—a project that helped secure additional FDA resources to improve regulatory efficiency. (12:04)  The discussion then shifts to collaboration with universities, where Laura emphasizes IFEEDER’s role as a bridge between academic research, industry needs, and nonprofit funding. By partnering with universities, IFEEDER helps align research proposals with real‑world challenges while strengthening grant competitiveness and knowledge transfer. (13:26)  Looking ahead, the panel outlines research priorities for 2026 and beyond, including sustainability, foreign animal disease prevention, biosecurity risks, and improving communication around animal health and nutrition. Sustainability is framed not only as environmental stewardship, but as the long‑term viability and profitability of the animal feed and pet food industries. (16:21)  Lara highlights strategic wins over the past five years, including the development of a formal strategic plan, increased industry visibility, and the creation of tools and datasets that support foot printing, feed formulation decisions, and industry advocacy. (18:59)  The episode wraps up with discussion of IFEEDER’s feed consumption reports, which quantify the economic impact of the feed industry at state and congressional district levels. These reports have become valuable tools for educating policymakers and supporting science‑based advocacy efforts on Capitol Hill. (21:52)  Final remarks encourage listeners to stay engaged with IFEEDER, subscribe to its newsletter, share research ideas, and support the foundation’s work through contributions and participation in its annual Day of Giving. (24:41)  Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange. If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected].

This episode features Andrea Lendewig, Head of Research & Development at IFCN, discussing her Real Science Exchange webinar presentation Global Dairy Market Status and 2035 Perspectives. Joining the conversation are Philipp Goetz, Head of Sales and Business Development at IFCN; Lucas Fess, Senior Dairy Analyst with Rabobank; and Jeremy Painter, Vice President of Global Commercial Operations for Animal Nutrition & Health at Balchem. Together, the panel examines current milk production trends, regional differences, butter and protein markets, exports, herd dynamics, and what the next decade may hold for global dairy. Andrea opens by outlining IFCN’s global dairy data network and explains how annual farm‑level data collection and monthly updates allow IFCN to monitor milk production, prices, and costs across major dairy regions. She highlights a major industry milestone: global milk production surpassing 1 billion tons, driven by growth across multiple regions. (04:40) The discussion then turns to recent production trends. The panel explains how the U.S. has shown consistent strength, while the EU experienced slower growth early before unexpected late‑season increases. China and parts of Latin America continue to grow production but remain dependent on international markets. Weather, animal health, and strong milk prices aligned to create production surprises in several regions. (17:30) Andrea and Lucas examine global milk price dynamics, focusing on the growing divergence between butter and cheese prices over the last decade. Butter prices have increasingly driven global milk price signals, influencing producer behavior and trade flows. One notable shift discussed is the U.S. becoming a net exporter of butter in 2025 after more than a decade as a net importer. (25:10) The panel also explores rising costs of milk production. IFCN data show that milk production costs have increased sharply over the last five years, with roughly 75% of countries now facing costs above $40 per hundredweight. These pressures are influencing farm investment decisions, particularly in regions with stricter environmental regulations. (28:30) Herd dynamics and beef‑on‑dairy economics are another key theme. Lucas and Jeremy describe how record beef prices have reshaped breeding decisions in the U.S., increased calf values, and encouraged producers to keep cows longer. This dynamic has contributed to U.S. herd growth and stronger-than-expected milk supply, raising the question of whether current production trends represent a new normal. (35:00) The conversation contrasts structural differences between Europe, and the U.S. European producers face tighter environmental regulations, land constraints, and aging farmer demographics, limiting expansion. In response, many EU farmers are diversifying income through solar energy, agri‑tourism, and land leasing rather than increasing milk output. Both IFCN and Rabobank suggest 2025 may represent peak milk production for the EU under current conditions. (45:00) Attention then shifts to exports and demand. Lucas outlines where U.S. dairy exports are growing—especially in Mexico, Asia, and emerging markets—and explains why exports will be critical as domestic consumption grows more slowly than production. The panel also discusses rising consumer interest in protein, from high‑protein milk and beverages to whey ingredients, and how this trend supports long‑term dairy demand. (51:00) Looking ahead to 2035, Andrea and Philip share IFCN’s long‑term outlook. The U.S. is expected to drive most global production growth, while Europe trends closer to self‑sufficiency and Oceania remains export‑focused. Demand growth—driven by population increases and more westernized diets in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East—is expected to outpace supply growth, supporting higher dairy prices over time. (57:30) In closing, the panel reflects on key takeaways: the importance of data‑driven decisions, diversification of farm income, continued productivity gains through genetics and technology, and strong long‑term fundamentals for dairy. While risks remain, the group agrees the global dairy sector is well positioned for the next decade. (01:02:00) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends. Invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table. Please be sure to register for our upcoming Real Science Lecture Series webinars. Finally, if you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Mike Van Amburgh begins by outlining how amino acid nutrition has historically been viewed almost exclusively through the lens of milk protein. He explains that emerging research clearly shows amino acids play far broader roles in the cow, influencing milk fat synthesis, energy metabolism, and overall efficiency. As genetic potential has increased, amino acids are now supporting many biological pathways beyond simple milk protein yield. (05:50) The discussion quickly expands to nitrogen efficiency and environmental sustainability. Dr. Van Amburgh explains that dairy systems across Europe and North America are under increasing pressure to reduce nitrogen losses. By formulating more precise diets that better match amino acid requirements, cows can excrete significantly less urinary nitrogen while maintaining—or even improving—milk production, creating both environmental and economic benefits. (09:30) An audience question shifts the conversation toward the challenge of quantifying amino acids in forages. The panel discusses the robustness of current CNCPS model libraries and explains why forage amino acid profiles tend to be relatively conserved. While management factors like heat damage or poor fermentation can alter availability, microbial protein ultimately supplies a large and consistent portion of metabolizable amino acids to the cow. (12:15) Building on this, the panel explores where required amino acids actually come from. Dr. Van Amburgh emphasizes that microbial protein should supply roughly half of total amino acid needs, making rumen efficiency critical. However, as production levels rise, microbial protein alone is no longer sufficient—creating a clear role for rumen‑protected amino acids to close growing nutritional gaps. (16:20) Dr. Usman Arshad then leads a deep discussion on choline and methionine in transition cows. He explains why these two nutrients are not interchangeable, despite both acting as methyl donors. Choline has a unique lipotropic role in supporting liver fat export and reducing fatty liver risk during early lactation, while methionine primarily supports milk production and protein synthesis. Research shows that choline supplementation during the transition period alone can generate lasting carryover improvements in milk yield later in lactation. (29:00) The panel addresses a common industry question: how much choline is enough? Dr. Arshad reviews decades of research, including meta‑analyses showing a largely linear response between choline ion intake and milk production. While 12–13 g/day of choline ion remains the standard recommendation based on most available studies, data suggest additional benefits may exist at higher levels—even though more research is still needed. (34:00) Attention then turns to amino acid nutrition in close‑up and fresh cows. Dr. Van Amburgh explains that recent infusion and feeding studies demonstrate much higher metabolizable protein requirements than traditionally assumed, driven in part by the important role of non‑essential amino acids. These nutrients support energy generation, glucose synthesis, and tissue metabolism during early lactation—contributing to substantial gains in energy‑corrected milk when requirements are met. (44:30) The panel also discusses whether amino acid balancing can help cows cope with heat stress. While amino acids do not eliminate heat stress, improving metabolic efficiency appears to reduce wasted heat production and support immune function and gut integrity, potentially helping cows better navigate stressful conditions. (54:45) From science to economics, producers raise questions about return on investment. The group shares real‑world examples showing that improving amino acid balance often increases milk components without increasing intake, frequently delivering returns of 2:1 or greater, depending on milk pricing and market structure. (58:00) Dr. Van Amburgh then offers candid insights into rumen‑protected amino acid bioavailability, explaining that products on the market are not created equal. Independent testing has shown efficiencies ranging from as low as ~10% to as high as ~80%. The panel stresses that transparent, published bioavailability data are essential for accurate formulation and for maintaining credibility across the industry. (01:01:30) A technical discussion follows on measuring amino acid bioavailability, comparing isotope dilution, selenium‑methionine, and in vitro approaches. The group agrees that no method is perfect, but understanding assumptions and applying methods consistently can produce reliable, actionable data. (01:06:00) In the final phase of the episode, the panel examines modern high‑starch diets, monensin use, and intake regulation. Dr. Van Amburgh suggests many systems may now be producing excessive propionate, potentially limiting intake through chemical fill. He argues that rebalancing starch and NDF—rather than simply adding more concentrate—may unlock better efficiency and performance. (01:10:00) The episode concludes with final audience questions and a call to rethink traditional nutrition paradigms. The panel emphasizes that precision amino acid nutrition—supported by sound science, verified bioavailability, and thoughtful diet structure—is becoming essential for meeting the production, economic, and environmental demands facing dairy systems today. (01:20:29) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Baumgard opens by explaining the origin of the “immune suppression” theory in transition cows. Research dating back to the late 1970s showed slower neutrophil infiltration into the mammary gland in early lactation, which led to the assumption that cows are immunosuppressed after calving. This idea has shaped industry thinking for more than 40 years. (10:43) He outlines two primary mechanisms traditionally blamed for immune suppression: the cortisol surge at calving, which may impair neutrophil migration, and the metabolic changes of early lactation—high NEFAs, ketones, and low calcium—which appear to reduce neutrophil function in laboratory settings. (13:16) Dr. Baumgard then challenges the central assumption: are cows truly immunosuppressed, or are they simply exposed to greater pathogen loads and stressors during a narrow window around calving? He argues that morbidity may reflect increased environmental and physiological challenges rather than a dysfunctional immune system. (15:25) Dr. Fry shares field data from three herds representing over 100,000 calvings. After implementing management changes—primarily building a well-designed transition barn with lower stocking density, improved hygiene, and better cow flow—metritis rates dropped from 21.3% to 9.7%. Nutrition and innate immunity remained unchanged, suggesting management and environment were key drivers. (21:29) The panel discusses the role of stress stacking during the transition period. Dr. Baumgard explains that multiple simultaneous stressors, such as overcrowding, heat stress, hygiene challenges, social stress, and nutritional shifts, may overwhelm cows. He emphasizes growing evidence that stress compromises gut integrity (“leaky gut”), potentially triggering systemic inflammation and increasing susceptibility in tissues like the mammary gland. (27:27) Heat stress provides another example. While mastitis rates often increase during humid Midwest summers, they decline in arid regions like Arizona and Israel despite severe heat stress. Dr. Baumgard suggests environmental pathogen load—not immune suppression—is the primary driver. (27:43) The conversation shifts to ketosis and hyperketonemia. Dr. Baumgard and Dr. Pralle discuss how elevated BHB and NEFAs may not always indicate disease but instead reflect normal metabolic adaptation to support milk production. The key distinction is productivity: cows milking well with high ketones may not require intervention, while cows with high ketones and poor milk production warrant deeper investigation into underlying causes such as metritis, mastitis, hypocalcemia, gut inflammation, or environmental stress. (37:13) Dr. Fry reinforces the importance of whole-cow and whole-environment evaluation rather than treating metabolic markers in isolation. Monitoring milk yield, rumination, activity, and cow demeanor—along with assessing stocking density, pen hygiene, hoof health, and stockmanship—are critical to identifying true problems. (44:00) The group emphasizes reducing pathogen load through simple, practical management: minimizing manure accumulation, maintaining clean and dry bedding, improving calving hygiene, and lowering stocking density—especially for close-up and fresh cows. (33:39) Looking ahead, Dr. Baumgard describes his lab’s focus on modeling “stacked stressors” to better replicate the real-world transition period. Rather than studying stressors in isolation, his team is investigating how combined stressors influence physiology, particularly gut health. (47:11) In closing, the panel encourages industry professionals to reconsider the immune suppression paradigm. Instead of trying to “fix” the immune system at calving, the emphasis should shift toward removing stressors and minimizing environmental challenges that create excessive pathogen exposure. (53:01) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Penner presented “Progress in the gut: What we know about ‘gut health’” to lead off the symposium. He highlights using rumen acidosis as a model for gut health, focusing on key structures and how paracellular permeability is maintained or dysregulated, absorptive function, and microbiology. He notes that rumen acidosis affects other parts of the gut besides the rumen. (4:52) Dr. Laarman wrapped up the  symposium with “Gut health in ruminants: Where to from here?” He agrees with Dr. Penner that we need to look beyond the rumen at all other gut organs. His group has researched rumen acidosis in calves and how it’s linked to hindgut acidosis and pH dynamics. Calves behave very differently from cows in this model. Gut health begins from birth and is the whole tract, not just the rumen.  (7:35) Work in Dr. Penner’s lab showed that inducing inflammation in the mammary gland actually tightened permeability in the GI tract, which was opposite of their initial hypothesis. Dr. Baumgard’s lab found similar results in a heat stress model, and Dr. Laarman echoes that his group has also found this result.  The panel discusses possible mechanisms of action. Dr. Penner explains that diet may also have an influence on gut permeability. (11:01) The panel talks more about what we know and don’t know about gut health. We probably know which regions of the gut are most likely to be affected by challenges, what those impacts are, how fast those gut changes occur, and how nutrient absorption can be affected by challenges. The group hypothesizes that pH alone does not have a negative effect, but if low pH occurs at the same time as other signals or molecules, then pathology happens. Dr. Laarman shares some of the observations his group has made with calves, which withstand low pH that would kill a mature cow if she experienced it. (18:40) Guests talk about some of the reasons why we know less about ruminant gut health compared to monogastric species. They also visit about the microbiome and how perhaps what the microbiome is doing and producing is more important than who all is present in the microbiome. (23:44) Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (29:33) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Recommendations for identification and selection of bioactive compounds to develop antimethanogenic feed additives. Dr. Yáñez-Ruiz (8:23) How can we search for molecules that modify how feed is fermented in the rumen? Conventionally, we have used scientific literature to look for plant extracts and compounds that have been researched before. Now, we have computational technology that offers opportunities to model how molecules interact with rumen microbes. Once a candidate compound is selected, in vitro tools can be used to test dose responses before animal experiments.  Recommendations for testing enteric methane-mitigating feed additives in ruminant studies. Dr. Yáñez-Ruiz for Dr. Alexander Hristov (17:07) Once compounds have been identified and selected, they need to be tested in the animal. These experiments are costly and best practices for experimental design, animals used, diets fed, delivery of the test compound, and measurement of methane should be followed. Some of these guidelines are strongly linked to the regulatory aspects that provide requirements for how in vivo trials need to be conducted.  Feed additives for methane mitigation: Modeling the impact of feed additives on enteric methane emission of ruminants—Approaches and recommendations. Dr. Bannink (22:43) Once experimental data is collected, it can be used to develop models to predict how effective an additive is, how it works, and its relevance. The intention is to quantify how an additive will work if you feed it to an animal. This can be complex due to variation among different datasets and natural fluctuation in methane production in the animal. One factor that plays a big role in the effectiveness of additives is the type of diet that animals are fed.  A guideline to uncover the mode of action of antimethanogenic feed additives for ruminants. Dr. Belanche (30:03) Understanding the mechanism of action for methane mitigants is challenging. We know some compounds work to reduce methane, but we don’t know how or why they are working. There are five main types of additives when grouped by mode of action: modify rumen fermentation to decrease hydrogen production; methane inhibitors that act specifically against methanogens; inhibit enzymes common to all methanogens; hydrogen sinks to redirect hydrogen away from methanogenesis and toward other metabolic pathways; and promote methanotrophs that oxidize methane. The most effective are methane inhibitors, which decrease methane but don’t increase animal productivity. Combining a methane inhibitor with a hydrogen sink may help redirect hydrogen and result in improved animal productivity. Regulations and evidence requirements for the authorization of enteric methane-mitigating feed additives. Dr. Tricarico (41:22) There are as many regulatory systems as there are jurisdictions. Two concepts that are shared across jurisdictions are regulatory status/legal classification and intended use. While each jurisdiction requires some legal classification of a feed additive compound, each has a different criteria base from which they classify products. For example, “inhibitor” is a legal classification in New Zealand, but doesn’t even exist in other jurisdictions. Sometimes, the same word may mean different things in different jurisdictions. Authorization of a compound is not a blanket authorization, it is an authorization of the intended use of the compound. This specificity is critical for all involved to understand. Feed additives for methane mitigation: How to account for the mitigating potential of antimethanogenic feed additives—Approaches and recommendations. Dr. del Prado (49:42) A major challenge in this area is what kind of accounting system will be used: farm level, lifecycle analysis, carbon markets, national greenhouse gas inventories, etc. An accounting system needs to be well tailored from the type of experimental data available to the complexity used on the scale of the method. Experimental data, modeling, and accounting move hand-in-hand.  Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (58:57) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Nichols opens by outlining her background in protein nutrition research spanning Canada, the Netherlands, industry R&D, and now academia at UC Davis. Her research has focused on mammary amino acid metabolism, nitrogen efficiency, and the interaction between protein and energy supply in dairy cattle. (1:00–4:05) Dr. Räisänen shares her path from Penn State to Finland, Switzerland, and now Aarhus University, where she is leading research within a large, multidisciplinary project focused on lifetime nitrogen efficiency in dairy systems. Her current work examines early lactation protein supply and rumen nitrogen balance. (7:32–10:07) The discussion begins by establishing why protein nutrition plays a central role in sustainability. Ruminants are net protein producers, converting low-value feeds into high-quality milk and meat protein. However, inefficiencies in nitrogen utilization lead to urinary nitrogen excretion, contributing to ammonia emissions, nitrous oxide production, and nitrate leaching. Improving nitrogen efficiency, therefore, directly impacts environmental outcomes. (12:28–14:17) The group discusses geographic differences in nitrogen regulation. European countries like the Netherlands and Denmark face intense scrutiny due to high livestock density on limited land. Similar regional challenges are emerging in concentrated U.S. dairy regions such as California’s Central Valley and parts of the Midwest. (15:17–18:19) Dr. Nichols introduces the concept of metabolic flexibility—the ability of ruminants, and especially the mammary gland, to utilize different nutrients and metabolic pathways depending on supply. This flexibility helps explain why responses to protein supplementation are not always black and white, and why traditional limiting amino acid theory does not consistently predict milk protein responses. (24:58–26:23) The conversation explores early lactation “protein boost” strategies inspired by post-ruminal amino acid infusion studies. Dr. Räisänen describes ongoing work using targeted concentrate supplementation to mimic infusion responses. Preliminary data suggest substantial early lactation milk yield responses, similar to infusion studies, when protein is delivered in a separate concentrate rather than blended into a TMR. (28:33–31:16) Dr. Nichols discusses three key areas of flexibility highlighted in her webinar: Energy source interactions (glucogenic vs. lipogenic supply),   Rumen nitrogen balance, and   Mammary gland amino acid metabolism. (32:21–33:50)   The panel explores how feeding systems may influence metabolic responses. PMR systems with separate concentrate feeding may allow temporal and metabolic “choice,” potentially improving efficiency compared to uniform TMR feeding. Robotic milking systems and automated concentrate feeders offer opportunities for more individualized protein nutrition strategies. (35:00–37:57) Amino acid discussions highlight how flexibility challenges the traditional limiting amino acid model. Milk protein synthesis is not consistently limited by one amino acid, and mammary uptake patterns show that amino acids can serve multiple roles beyond direct incorporation into milk protein. Lysine, leucine, and histidine are discussed as examples of amino acids whose responses may vary depending on metabolic context. (41:07–45:25) The group also examines energy source effects on nitrogen partitioning. Lipogenic diets (e.g., supplemental fats) may alter amino acid metabolism differently than glucogenic diets, but more research is needed to fully characterize these interactions. (49:24–53:11) Dr. Räisänen emphasizes the importance of rumen microbial protein synthesis and improving prediction models for digestible amino acid supply. Better understanding and measurement of microbial protein output could significantly improve feed evaluation systems and nitrogen efficiency modeling. (54:04–56:05) Dr. Nichols highlights endogenous nitrogen recycling and urea transport back to the rumen as another underexplored area. Improved mechanistic understanding of recycled nitrogen could refine models of rumen nitrogen balance and reduce overfeeding of dietary protein. (1:00:46) The episode closes with a discussion of cow-to-cow variation in nitrogen efficiency and the potential for individualized feeding strategies to optimize the marginal efficiency of protein use. (1:02:00) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Dr. Ricklefs-Johnson talks about bone health and the cardiovascular health benefits of cheese. Calcium, phosphorus, and vitamins D, K, and B12 are all important for bone health, and cheese is a good source of each. In the past, saturated fat in cheese would have been demonized, but research is finding that saturated fat isn’t created equally across all food types, and cheese has many unique fatty acids. Cheese consumption is associated with reduced risks of coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. Cheese contains bioactive peptides that appear to help lower blood pressure. (4:18) The panel discusses the mechanisms of action of cheese consumption on cardiovascular health, how much cheese is recommended daily, and whether different cheeses have different health benefits. Dr. Ricklefs-Johnson explains that the protein in cheese is primarily in the form of casein, rather than whey. Casein had been less utilized as it was thought harder to digest, but more research is showing the benefits of casein in muscle recovery and helping with sleep. (8:27) Research supports that calcium from cow milk sources is more bioavailable compared to supplements or fortified calcium in plant milks. Cheese is also unique as a dairy food that contains vitamin K, which works in conjunction with vitamin D and calcium for maintaining bone mass. (15:07) The panel visits about some of the other presentations at the symposium, including feeding cows to influence vitamin K or fatty acids in the milk and how to get the word out about the health benefits of cheese. (19:16) Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (26:29) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt. 

Dr. Rico’s presentation was titled “Of cows and bugs: Using insects as alternative feeds in dairy cattle nutrition.” He gives an overview of his presentation, noting that while insects are not a major focus of US dairy nutrition, they are of interest in other parts of the world as a protein source to substitute for soybean or fish meal. (2:12) Dr. Dou’s talk was “Alternative feed for livestock: Opportunities and challenges to support a circular food system.” She explains that a typical agriculture/food system is linear: take, make, and waste, which generates a lot of food residues. Her research aims to recover and recycle some of the food residues from other industries and evaluate their suitability for livestock feeding. (3:51) Dr. Pinotti’s presentation was titled “Alternative foodstuffs in dairy ruminant nutrition: Basic concepts, recent issues, and future challenges.” His research focuses on using “former food” for livestock feeding and feeding insects not only as a protein source but also as a potential mineral source. (5:38) Dr. Pinotti talks about the challenges around variability in alternative feedstuffs. He goes on to describe some of the bakery byproducts he has used in research rations. He calls them fortified versions of cereal. They contain quite a lot of starch and also contain a lot of fat. These ingredients are ideal for young monogastric animals and also have utility in lactating dairy cow diets. The panel discusses the EU animal protein ban and whether similar restrictions exist for animal fats. (10:16) Dr. Rico notes that insects contain between 40 and 70% protein, depending on the type of insect. Crickets, mealworms, and black soldier fly larvae are the most popular. The fly larvae have a higher fat content compared to crickets and are a good energy source for monogastrics like pigs, chickens, or fish. Less is understood about the feeding value of insects in ruminant diets, and Dr. Rico’s lab has been conducting experiments to help define this in dairy cattle. He notes the chitin content of insects is a unique challenge due to its indigestibility. It comes out in the NDF fraction in a nutrient analysis, but it is animal fiber, not plant fiber. (21:27) The panel talks about the scalability of insects as a protein source and confirms that the theory that insects are a cheap protein source is different from reality at this time. The group talks about small-scale insect projects at universities and in Africa. (27:17) Dr. Pinotti explains that insects are quite good at accumulating minerals, bad and good. His group conducted an experiment using sodium selenite as the substrate and the insects made selenocysteine and selenomethionine. Future research will include zinc as well as selenium in the substrate, and insects will be fed in an in vivo trial to verify bioavailability. He does not envision issues with chitin interfering with bioavailability since the insects incorporate the minerals into amino acids. (34:27) Dr. Rico talks about the amino acid and fatty acid profiles in insects. Essential amino acid content is relatively similar to other common protein sources. Insects contain higher levels of lauric and myristic acids than other common sources which could pose a challenge for lactation diets. He explains that there is a low-fat source of black soldier fly larvae with around 12% fat, compared to 30% in the full-fat version. The panel talks about variability in protein and fat content by insect type and the substrate the insects were grown on. (37:35) Dr. Dou describes some of her circular feed research using fresh cull fruit (kiwi, citrus, apples; delivered daily) blended into the TMR. Later, she also ensiled the fruit with dry hay in an effort to preserve the fruit before spoilage. Dr. Pinotti notes that he has used cull material from a salad plant as feed as well.  (44:31) Dr. Dou reports that one-third of food produced for human consumption never makes it to the human stomach. Globally, it’s estimated that 1.6-1.9 billion tons of food are lost and wasted each year. The panel talks about the biggest challenges keeping us from using more former food products in livestock feeding. (50:54) Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (59:51) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.

This episode’s guests were speakers on a Hot Topic Panel titled “Farm Management for the Future - Managing for Health, Welfare, and Performance” at the 2025 ADSA annual meeting.  Dr. Nelson gives some background on how the Hot Topic Panel idea came to be and introduces the rest of the guests. (1:07) Dr. Devries describes his research program in dairy cattle behavior and nutrition, particularly using behavior as a metric for understanding nutrition and housing management and using automated tools. He has particular expertise in automated milking systems. He envisions incremental adoption of various automated tools to replace human labor in the manufacturing of milk. He predicts this will manifest not only in automated or robot systems, but also in increased automation in a traditional parlor system as well. (5:01) Dr. Boerman, a nutritionist, collaborates with Dr. Amy Reibman, an engineer, at Purdue to research the use of video analytics on dairy farms. Projects include video prediction of cow intake and cow body weight combined with milk production information in an effort to make improvements in feed efficiency. She emphasizes that technology needs to be used across a large number of farms without disrupting the farm. The panel talks about what technologies are currently available, challenges in identifying individual cows, and specific issues created for technology in a dairy farm environment. Dr. Boerman notes that a collaborative effort with colleagues of different expertise leads to the most optimal outcomes. (15:42) Dr. Giordano talks about monitoring systems for reproduction, health, and welfare. Wearable sensors are a good example of a technology that can be used to monitor both reproduction and health, as well as aspects of nutritional management. The goal of many research programs in this area is to touch cows as little as possible, yet intervene as early and intensely as possible with cows who truly need intervention. An intervention could be a treatment to ameliorate or reduce clinical signs, or it could be a preventative intervention that prevents the cow from developing a clinical health disorder. More work is needed to refine algorithms and integrate data, as well as distilling the data into what is most valuable to make the best predictions at the most reasonable cost.  (34:08) The panel further discusses the challenges of data integration, adequate internet and power access on farms, human error for manual data entry, and future training challenges for dairy farm and allied industry employees.(38:32) Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (52:26) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Genetic resilience and the dynamics of inbreeding and diversity in dairy breeding. Dr. Maltecca (6:43) The main issues in managing genetic diversity in dairy cattle include inbreeding depression and continuing selection without exhausting the available variability in the population. These are difficult to investigate in a breeding population, as there is not a model algorithm where there is the luxury of designing an experiment. Dairy cattle closely resemble one another, so it is difficult to distinguish between the effect of selection from the effect of drift and the effect of deleterious mutation accumulation in the population. Researchers find proxies to estimate inbreeding and inbreeding depression because we don’t have good estimates of dominance effects. Identifying genetic diversity within indigenous and highly commercialized breeds for improved performance and future preservation. Dr. Huson (12:24) Dr. Huson covered four steps of thinking about genetic diversity in cattle: characterization of the genetic diversity, biological understanding of why we should preserve diversity, utilizing our understanding of diversity in breeding programs, and preserving and reassessing diversity over time.  Harnessing indigenous African breeds for sustainable dairy production: Opportunities for crossbreeding to accelerate genetic improvement. Dr. Mapholi (16:52) Dr. Mapholi emphasized the importance of tick and disease resistance for the sustainability of the African dairy industry. The indigenous African breeds had been overlooked due to small frame size and the perception they were not suitable for commercial farming, but they have excellent tick and disease resistance. Exotic breeds from the US and Europe struggled with the harsh environment. Crossbreeding indigenous and exotic breeds is allowing for simultaneous improvement in milk production and disease resistance. Genomics is particularly helpful to identify the best candidate breeds for crossing. Genomic- versus pedigree-based inbreeding: 2 sides of the same coin. Dr. Macciotta (24:19) It was thought that genomic selection would help in slowing the increase of inbreeding because we were looking at the DNA of the animal, not their pedigree. However, the traditional top animals were the population from which genomic selection began, and genomic selection shortens generation interval, so inbreeding continues to increase at a faster rate. Genomics offer new tools for investigating inbreeding, but there are 10-15 options to calculate inbreeding, all of which could provide a different answer. With pedigree selection, there is only one measurement of inbreeding. We are still investigating the best method for calculating inbreeding using genomic tools. Managing genetic diversity: Strategies for sustainable livestock improvement. Dr. Baes (27:53) Genomic selection has increased the speed at which animals become more related. There are negative implications of inbreeding, but today, the genetic and economic gains achieved through the current intense directional selection still far outweigh the inbreeding issues. No one knows where the edge of the cliff is, however. Dr. Baes envisions an international system one day where academia, AI companies, and producers all work together to understand and manage genetic diversity in livestock. The panelists discuss key takeaways they got from the other speakers’ presentations and give perspectives on the topic of genetic diversity for their particular country and field of study. (34:58) Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (46:10) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Host Scott Sorrell begins the episode by setting expectations for a science-first conversation on chelated trace minerals, noting panelist affiliations while emphasizing that the discussion is grounded in research, not promotion. Stephen Ashmead, Senior Fellow for Chelates with Balchem, shares the origins of chelated mineral technology through Albion Laboratories, founded in 1956 by his grandfather, Harvey Ashmead, after recognizing challenges with mineral absorption. The conversation also introduces Dr. Bill Weiss of The Ohio State University and co-host Dr. Maria Spinola, who brings both veterinary and applied nutrition perspectives to the discussion. (00:08) The panel explains chelated minerals from a chemistry standpoint, describing how organic ligands form stable ring structures around trace minerals, helping protect them from antagonists in feed and water. The discussion also extends beyond dairy into human nutrition, including examples such as magnesium and iron, highlighting how mineral interactions affect absorption across species. (09:20) Dr. Weiss and Dr. Spinola discuss emerging research showing that mineral sources can influence rumen and intestinal microbial populations. The group also explores how inorganic minerals can accelerate the degradation of vitamins A and E in premixes, particularly over time and under heat, whereas organic minerals are largely inert and help preserve vitamin potency. (14:20) The panel acknowledges the difficulty of trace mineral research due to limited biomarkers and subtle performance responses. They emphasize the importance of using averages for forage mineral contributions rather than relying on single samples, and caution against assuming zero mineral supply from forages. (25:00) A candid discussion centers on over-supplementation, with consensus that many diets exceed trace mineral requirements, particularly for copper and vitamins. Dr. Weiss explains the difference between requirements and recommendations, noting that modest safety margins are justified to account for biological variability, but feeding two to three times the requirements increases cost and risk without clear benefit. (37:57) The episode concludes with a warning against “too-good-to-be-true” organic mineral products, explaining why unusually high metal percentages often indicate inferior chemistry. The panelists emphasize that mineral quality, ligand structure and supplier credibility are important in the long term. The panel's final takeaways reinforce feeding minerals thoughtfully, enough to meet needs, but not in excess. Lastly, you need to consider the microbiome effects, vitamin stability and consistency in delivery when feeding these mineral products. (49:41)

Greg Nye introduces himself and Mountain View Dairy, where he manages three facilities and associated farm ground. He outlines the design and construction timeline of their fully enclosed feed center and shares the three primary benefits behind the project: reduced shrinkage, improved ration consistency, and enhanced employee safety. (1:41) Greg explains how external receiving and intentionally separated traffic flows eliminate cross-traffic between loaders and delivery trucks, which significantly improves safety and efficiency. The group discusses early design considerations, lessons learned from other operations, and how “R&D” (rob and duplicate) helped shape the final layout of the facility. (2:32) Scott and Walt introduce footage showing how feeds are received, stored, and staged. Greg walks through the grain elevator, unloading, conveyor systems, bay storage, and handling efficiencies that minimize ingredient touches. (5:03) Greg explains how strategic ingredient placement and facility layout shorten cycle time for high-use ingredients while maintaining flexibility for premixes and specialty feeds. He then goes into inventory management strategies, including rotating bins, tracking shrinkage, and maintaining ingredient freshness. (6:32) The conversation shifts to dust control and shrink reduction, highlighting the enclosed facility design and the use of an industrial baghouse system to recapture nutrients. Feed processing is simplified by reducing complex operations to just a few controls. Greg highlights the impact of reducing corn handling to a single touch and how it accelerated ROI.  (8:28) Finally, Greg discusses ration delivery innovations, including feed staging on conveyors and a custom delivery box that allows multiple loads to be staged and delivered efficiently. He shares how learning from other operations and refining those ideas to fit their scale and how it played a critical role in designing a system that maximizes efficiency without sacrificing flexibility. (15:08) As we look ahead, join us for the next Real Producers Exchange on Tuesday, February 17, 2026, featuring Skylar Gerke, an Arizona dairyman with Midwestern roots. Skylar brings a unique perspective on what it’s like to transition from Midwest dairying to operating in the West. Registration is now open at balchem.com/real-science or agproud.com/real-producer. And as always, thank you to Walt for riding shotgun once again, and to our loyal listeners—thanks for being part of the journey. (20:39)

This episode’s guests were speakers on the Joint ADSA-CSAS Breeding and Genetics Symposium: Dairy Welfare—Breeding and Management Strategies at the 2025 ADSA annual meeting.  Jessica’s talk was titled “Herd Sustainability Index: Using milk recording data to evaluate dairy herd sustainability.” This index provides a national percentile ranking benchmark for producers relative to sustainability from DHI data. The index evaluates ten indicators in four major categories: longevity and culling, feeding and production, heifers, and health. (2:51) Dr. Vasseur’s talk was titled “Improving welfare through inclusive innovation: The story of WELL-E.” This inclusive innovation delivers data-driven solutions with and for the Canadian dairy industry by integrating stakeholder and domain knowledge with cutting-edge tools and methods of the improvement of animal and human welfare. (4:48) Dr. Vasseur talks about the development of the Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Dairy Cattle, which was published in 2023. This most recent code of practice included recommendations and requirements for more opportunities for movement for dairy cattle, particularly those in tie stall environments. Dr. Vasseur’s lab has conducted research in this area to help dairy producers with possible modifications of stalls and other recommendations to improve cow comfort. Jessica describes her master’s research in tie stall modifications. The guests go on to talk about how often cows in tie stalls bump into their stall, some proof-on-concept research looking at doubling stall size, and recommendations for cow comfort improvements in existing tie stall operations. (6:53) Dr. Vasseur discusses the relationship between cow comfort and longevity. She also talks about the realities of converting a tie stall barn to a free stall barn. (20:12) Jessica describes the indicators used in the Herd Sustainability Index in more detail. A minimum of six tests in the last 12 months with 50% of the cows being recorded are needed to calculate the index for a farm. Seven of the ten HSI indicators are required for the index to be calculated. She goes on to explain how producers can see their index compared to the rest of Canada as well as historical change in their index, and details an incentive program for high-indexing and most-improved herds. (24:07) Dr. Vasseur talks about cow comfort and welfare comparisons among intensive dairy production countries. She envisions the development and implementation of technology to allow for more automation and reduced observer bias of processes such as lameness evaluation. (30:30) So what is WELL-E? Dr. Vasseur gives some background and details about bringing together animal scientists, computer scientists, and stakeholders to develop cutting-edge tools for the improvement of animal and human welfare. (33:24) Jessica talks about her PhD research in dairy cow behavior and pasture management. She conducted a study where pastures were mowed the morning of grazing compared to conventional grazing. Cows in the mowed pastures spent more time ruminating and drank more water, but no differences in milk production or milk components were observed. (38:02) Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (43:07) Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.   If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to [email protected]. Include your size and mailing address, and we’ll mail you a shirt.

Rob and Adrian share their family’s journey, from Dutch immigrant roots to managing large-scale dairy operations in California and Colorado, and discuss how communication, leadership structure and disciplined decision-making have helped them successfully scale their operation. The conversation also dives into lessons learned from facility design, sustainability initiatives and the launch of a consumer colostrum brand rooted in dairy science. Rob and Adrian introduce themselves and share their family’s immigration story and early dairy roots in California, including how prior generations entered the U.S. dairy industry. (1:01) The Diepersloot’s tell the story growth on their dairy operations, including expansion in California, the decision to diversify geographically and the opportunity that led them to build Wolf Creek Dairy in Colorado in 2017. (1:29) Rob and Adrian describe how they build and empower a strong leadership team, emphasizing the importance of hiring the right people, expecting managers to think like owners, and conducting efficient and candid meetings that focus on the entire business. (6:25) The conversation shifts to facility design and operational successes in Colorado, including no-headlock systems, sort gates, feed efficiency improvements, and later adopted in California. (9:59) Sustainability initiatives are explored, including methane digesters, power generation, manure management and solar energy projects, with a comparison of approaches between California and Colorado. (11:10) Rob and Adrian share lessons learned from technology challenges, including manure handling systems, activity collars, and feeding infrastructure, and how those experiences shaped future decisions. (15:46) The discussion turns to the origin of WonderCow Nutrition, detailing how academic research on colostrum and personal family experiences led to the launch of a consumer colostrum brand in 2023. (17:47) Rob explains WonderCow’s calf-first sourcing commitment, how colostrum is collected responsibly, and what differentiates whole colostrum products from skim-based alternatives. (20:19) The episode concludes with a preview of the exclusive “Back 30” live Q&A, available only to live webinar attendees, and a reminder of upcoming Real Producer Exchange events including the next one on February 17 with Skylar Gericke out of Arizona which will focus on reproduction success and heat stress. (23:23)