Effect of calving interval on the economic results of dairy farms based on their typology.

(1)

Effect of calving

interval

on the economic

results

of dairy farms

based on their

typology

Anne-Catherine Dalcq*

1

, Yves Beckers

1

,

Patrick Mayeres

2

, Benoit Wyzen

2

, Hélène

Soyeurt

1

1Université de Liège-Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, Gembloux,

(2)

(3)

The calving interval is extending…

•United States of America: 392  407 days from 1991 to 2002 (USDA, 2002)

(4)

The calving interval is extending…

•The Netherlands: 390  417 days from 1995 to 2012 (CRV, 2012)

(5)

The calving interval is extending…

(6)

The calving interval is extending…

•The Walloon Region (AWE, 2014) :

(7)

The calving interval is extending…

•The Walloon Region (AWE, 2014) :

Which impact on the economic results of the farm? Which calving interval = current economic optimum?

(8)

Available data?

- 1568 balance sheets

- Walloon Breeding Association

- 2007-2013

- 373 farms  Geographical localisation : Région

herbagère liégeoise

(9)

Available data?

- 1568 balance sheets

- Walloon Breeding Association

- 2007-2013

- 373 farms  Geographical localisation : Région

herbagère liégeoise

Information

**per herd*year**

(10)

Global approach

(11)

Global approach

•Relation between gross margin/ cow and CI

= total production (milk and meat) – variable costs (herd and feeding) = total production (milk and meat) – variable costs (herd and feeding)

(12)

Global approach

•Relation between gross margin/ cow and CI

(13)

Global approach

•Relation between gross margin/ cow and CI

Not ONE economic optimum

of CI



Several economic optimum

of CI, depending on the

(14)

Study of the relation

between the economic

results and the CI

in groups of farms showing

the same typology

(15)

Study of the relation between the economic results and the CI

(16)

in groups of farms showing the same typology

Ares of corn silage (CS)/ livestock unit

(17)

(LU)

(18)

(LU)

(19)

(LU)

Ares of grass/ LU Concentrate / cow

Numerical classification

(20)

Multiple

correspondence analysis

(21)

Multiple

(22)

Multiple

(23)

Multiple

(24)

Multiple

(25)

Modelling in each group

(26)

Modelling economic results in function of

…

CI variables:

- % cows in the herd with CI > 459 days

organized in 4 classes

(27)

Modelling economic results in function of

…

CI variables:

- CI profile organized in 5 classes determined by

Numerical Classification on the variables

CI profile

% of cows in the herd with CI < 380 days

% of cows in the herd with 380 < CI < 419 days

% of cows in the herd with CI > 459 days

(28)

Modelling economic results in function of

…

CI variables:

- CI profile organized in 5 classes determined by

Numerical Classification on the variables

CI profile Short

CI % of cows in the herd with CI < 380

days 52

19 % of cows in the herd with 420 < CI

< 459 days 9

% of cows in the herd with CI > 459

(29)

Modelling economic results in function of

…

CI variables:

- CI profile organized in 5 classes determined by

Numerical Classification on the variables

CI profile Short Long

CI % of cows in the herd with CI < 380

days 52 28

19 17

% of cows in the herd with 420 < CI

< 459 days 9 13

% of cows in the herd with CI > 459

(30)

Modelling economic results in function of

…

CI variables:

- CI profile organized in 5 classes determined by

Numerical Classification on the variables

CI profile Short Inter.

A Inter. B Inter. C Long CI

% of cows in the herd with CI < 380 days

52 27 30 37 28

< 419 days 19 24 20 19 17

< 459 days 9 27 14 18 13

% of cows in the herd with CI > 459 days

(31)

Milk production & calving interval

- No significant relations between gross margin/ cow and CI variables

(32)

Milk production & calving interval

- Assumption : In a given group, economic results when milk production

(33)

Milk production & calving interval

- Assumption : In a given group, economic results when milk production

Pearson’s r : milk production/ cow & gross margin/ cow

Intensive

group

Less intensive

group

group without

Intensive

CS

Extensive

group

(34)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Less intensive group}

(35)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Less intensive group}

(36)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Less intensive group}

(37)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Extensive group}

(38)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Extensive group}

(39)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Intensive group without CS}

(40)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Intensive group without CS}

(41)

Why ?

• Longer voluntary waiting period (10 weeks vs 6

weeks) = economically optimum under some

conditions (Inchaisri et al., 2011):

(42)

Why ?

• Longer voluntary waiting period (10 weeks vs 6

weeks) = economically optimum under some

conditions (Inchaisri et al., 2011):

- No Holstein-Friesian breed

In the dataset used :

Intensiv

e group Less intensiv e group Intensiv e group without CS Extensiv e group

% herds in the group with Hostein as main breed

(43)

Why ?

• Longer voluntary waiting period (10 weeks vs 6

weeks) = economically optimum under some

conditions (Inchaisri et al., 2011):

- No Holstein-Friesian breed

- Low herd milk production

(44)

Milk production in function of CI in EACH

group

_{Intensive group}

_{Extensive group}

(45)

Why ?

• Longer voluntary waiting period (10 weeks vs 6

weeks) = economically optimum under some

conditions (Inchaisri et al., 2011):

- No Holstein-Friesian breed

- Low herd milk production

- High milk persistency

(46)

Why ?

• Longer voluntary waiting period (10 weeks vs 6

weeks) = economically optimum under some

conditions (Inchaisri et al., 2011):

- No Holstein-Friesian breed

- Low herd milk production

- High milk persistency

• Better persistency (670 days in milk (DIM)) for

cows pasture fed (daily dietary intake 160 MJ of ME/cow)

><

(47)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

(48)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

- Information per herd

(49)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

- Information per herd

 averaged information

(50)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

- Information per herd

 averaged information

 low tendencies observed

(51)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

- Information per herd

 averaged information

 low tendencies observed

- Future research  information per cow

(52)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

- Information per herd

 averaged information

 low tendencies observed

- Future research  information per cow

- explain the present results (persistency)

- confirm the low tendencies observed

(53)

Limits on the current research and

further analyses

- Information per herd

 averaged information

 low tendencies observed

- Future research  information per cow

- explain the present results (persistency)

- confirm the low tendencies observed

(54)

Acknowledgments

- Unit of Modelling and Development,

Gx-ABT, Ulg

- University of Liège

(55)