JDS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Funk, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Funk, D. A.
J. Dairy Sci. 89:1362-1368
© American Dairy Science Association, 2006.

Major Advances in Globalization and Consolidation of the Artificial Insemination Industry

D. A. Funk

ABS Global, Inc., DeForest, WI 53532

E-mail: dfunk{at}absglobal.com

The artificial insemination (AI) industry in the United States has gone through many consolidations, mergers, and acquisitions over the past 25 yr. There are 5 major AI companies in the United States today: 3 large cooperatives, 1 private company, and 1 public company. The latter 2 have majority ownership outside of the United States. The AI industry in the United States progeny-tests more than 1,000 Holstein young sires per year. Because healthy, mature dairy bulls are capable of producing well over 100,000 straws of frozen semen per year, only a relatively small number of bulls are needed to breed the world’s population of dairy cows. Most AI companies in the United States do not own many, if any, females and tend to utilize the same maternal families in their breeding programs. Little differences exist among the selection programs of the AI companies in the United States. The similarity of breeding programs and the extreme semen-production capabilities of bulls have contributed to difficulties the AI companies have had in developing genetically different product lines. Exports of North American Holstein genetics increased steadily from the 1970s into the 1990s because of the perceived superiority of North American Holsteins for dairy traits compared with European strains, especially for production. The breeding industry moved towards international genetic evaluations of bulls in the 1990s, with the International Bull Evaluation Service (Interbull) in Sweden coordinating the evaluations. The extensive exchange of elite genetics has led to a global dairy genetics industry with bulls that are closely related, and the average inbreeding level for the major dairy breeds continues to increase. Genetic markers have been used extensively and successfully by the industry for qualitative traits, especially for recessive genetic disorders, but markers have had limited impact for quantitative traits. Selection emphasis continues to migrate away from production traits and towards nonproduction traits, especially towards health and fitness traits. Specifically, fertility has arguably become the major breeding and management issue facing dairy farmers today. Some producers have implemented crossbreeding programs in an effort to capitalize on heterosis, and crossbreeding will almost certainly need to be a bigger part of the AI companies business in the years ahead.

Key Words: progeny test • genetic marker • Interbull • inbreeding




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
B. J. Heins, L. B. Hansen, A. J. Seykora, A. R. Hazel, D. G. Johnson, and J. G. Linn
Crossbreds of Jersey x Holstein Compared with Pure Holsteins for Body Weight, Body Condition Score, Dry Matter Intake, and Feed Efficiency During the First One Hundred Fifty Days of First Lactation
J Dairy Sci, September 1, 2008; 91(9): 3716 - 3722.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
B. J. Heins, L. B. Hansen, A. J. Seykora, D. G. Johnson, J. G. Linn, J. E. Romano, and A. R. Hazel
Crossbreds of Jersey x Holstein Compared with Pure Holsteins for Production, Fertility, and Body and Udder Measurements During First Lactation
J Dairy Sci, March 1, 2008; 91(3): 1270 - 1278.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
A. De Vries, M. Overton, J. Fetrow, K. Leslie, S. Eicker, and G. Rogers
Exploring the Impact of Sexed Semen on the Structure of the Dairy Industry
J Dairy Sci, February 1, 2008; 91(2): 847 - 856.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Dairy Science Association ®.