I then look back to see if its forage starch level has changed substantially from previous years’ silages fed to lactating dairy cows. I also look at its fibre values (ADF, NDF, NDF30) to see what kind of effective-fibre foundation we may be dealing with in any new lactation diets.

That’s because forage starch levels and effective-fibre content will significantly contribute to the overall energy density of the lactation dairy diet. Balanced together, they should maintain both good health and excellent milk production in lactating dairy cows.

Last October, a 350-dairy cow operation started feeding its last bag of 2023 corn silage to lactating dairy cows.

Part of the issue in feeding it was that its forage analysis (see accompanying chart) revealed a relatively low neutral detergent fibre (NDF) and high digestibility as well as a grain-enriched starch level of 31 per cent and non-fibre carbohydrates (NFC) of 40.6 per cent. Subsequently, the pending TMR (total mixed ration) diet was in danger of having inadequate effective fibre (eNDF) to maintain good rumen health in the cow herd.

Six months ago, I made the best changes to the above lactation TMR diet:

• Corn silage was limited to about 10 kg dry matter (DM), to limit its starch and NFC intake — offset by alfalfa silage;
• Grain corn was severely cut back, to 3.6 kg, to do the same;
• Alfalfa haylage was used to help raise effective-forage fibre levels, but its fair levels of eNDF and high soluble protein reduced its use and effectiveness;
• Canola meal was limited to curb its vegetable oil intake; and
• Beet pulp was added at 1.5 kg.

In summary, on a dry matter basis: the forage/concentrate ratio was 63.5 per cent; eNDF, 22.5 per cent; starch, 23.2 per cent; and NFC, 39.4 per cent.

Now the first bag of 2024 corn silage has been opened up and its analysis is shockingly different (see accompanying chart) from 2023. It is much wetter. It has higher ADF and NDF values with a precipitous drop in starch of 21.1 per cent and an NFC of 34.4 per cent.

For the time being, I have yet to change the integrity of the forage base of the lactation TMR, but have increased grain corn levels to 4.5 kg to achieve a dietary starch level of about 21 per cent.

Plus, I still adhere to the maintenance of an overall 28 per cent NDF in the entire TMR with 21 per cent forage-NDF level to prevent digestive upsets or the onset of SARA (sub-clinical acidosis). As a result, current milk production hovers around 38 kg per head with 4.5 per cent milk fat.

Although the producer and I are satisfied with the current body condition score of the lactation cows — average of 3 to 3.5 — we feel that above milk performance flatlined at 135 DIMs (days in milk). We believe the starch and NFC level of the TMR is adequate, but the rate of starch digestion is lower than it should be. Since no barley is fed on this dairy farm, I suggested a load of barley be brought in to replace up to 2.5 kg of the grain corn fed.

The reason: barley grain may contain a lower amount of starch compared to corn (58 per cent to 72 per cent), but its starch is more rapidly digested in the gut and therefore its energy release is quicker.

In contrast, the endosperm of corn starch is embedded in a highly-resistant protein matrix that repels microbial invasion. Also, a significant portion of corn starch is forced into the small intestine to complete its digestion, which in some cases may limit the rumen microbes’ activities for efficient digestion of forages, grains and protein concentrates to release their essential nutrients for lactation purposes.

Dairy producers who feed barley silage to their lactation dairy herd might think that this is an only-corn-silage problem. I’ve reviewed many barley silage samples and their starch levels have also fallen (from 17 per cent down to 10-11 per cent) with higher-than-expected ADF and NDF levels. As a dairy nutritionist, I can advocate that simply feeding more barley grain to lactating dairy cows isn’t necessarily the answer in these cases — but maybe feeding some barley in combination with corn.

The post Well-balanced starch and forage levels make milk appeared first on Grainews.

Canola meal futures traded on the Zhengzhou Commodity Exchange have jumped more than eight per cent since Beijing announced on Saturday a 100 per cent retaliatory tariff on imports of canola meal and oil from Canada effective March 20.

Why it matters: Canadian farmers have seen canola prices plummet after China slapped tariffs on canola oil and meal

“The introduction of this tax increase policy instantly broke the original trade balance,” consultancy Mysteel wrote in a note.

Chinese tariffs on canola meal and oil came as a surprise to the industry which had been expecting higher duties instead on the oilseed since Beijing started an anti-dumping investigation in September into shipments from Canada.

“Everybody was expecting authorities to announce duties on rapeseed but we were all taken by surprise when this announcement came on oil and meal,” said one trader in Singapore. “It is going to hit feed processors hard as they were looking at importing larger volumes of Canadian meal instead of the oilseed.”

Canola (rapeseed) is an oilseed crop which is processed into oil for cooking and a variety of other products, including renewable fuels, while the remaining canola meal is used as high-protein animal feed and fertilizer.

China relies on top grower Canada for more than 70 per cent of its canola meal imports and nearly all of the oilseed imports.

For now, China has ample supply of canola, meal and oil after hefty imports in the fourth quarter last year, buffering against an immediate supply shock.

But traders and analysts warned of an impending shortage by the third quarter of this year when the stockpile depletes.

Limited canola meal available

Chinese customs allows canola meal imports from 11 countries, including Russia, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Japan, Ethiopia, Australia, India and Belarus, providing options for alternative supplies.

But availability of the product is limited in the international market.

In 2024, China imported 2.02 million metric tons of the meal from Canada, followed by 504,000 tons from the United Arab Emirates and 135,000 tons from Russia, according to customs data.

Some of China’s demand could shift to Russia, Ukraine or India, but these countries are unlikely to be able to fully satisfy Chinese appetite, traders and analysts said.

“No country really has the scale Canada has,” Ole Houe, director of advisory services at IKON Commodities in Sydney, said.

Australia, the world’s second-biggest rapeseed exporter, does not have much surplus or the crushing capacity to significantly raise its rapeseed meal exports, Houe said.

India is the world’s second-largest canola meal exporter and ships around 2 million tons of meal annually, although higher prices capped 2024 shipments to China at only 13,100 tons.

In order to make up for the supply gap, the market may rely more on domestic canola meal or turn to soybean meal, Rosa Wang, analyst at Shanghai-based agro-consultancy JCI, said.

The majority of animal feed producers in China rely on soymeal as a key protein source. However, some industries, particularly aquaculture, prefer canola meal.

China in its policy documents said that it will increase the planting of canola this year.

— Additional reporting by Naveen Thukral and Rajendra Jadhav

The post China set for canola meal shortage after 100 per cent duty on top supplier Canada appeared first on Grainews.

Glacier FarmMedia — A new trade war front opened over the weekend as China announced stiff tariffs on Canadian canola oil, meal, peas, pork and other commodities late Friday. Canadian industry groups decried the move and are calling on the federal government to intervene.

China will apply a 100 per cent tariff to Canadian canola oil, meal and pea imports, and a 25 per cent duty on Canadian aquatic products and pork starting March 20, China’s Ministry of Commerce said in a statement.

The Chinese move was in response to Canada’s 100 per cent tariff on Chinese EVs and 25 per cent levy on its aluminium and steel products that China says, “seriously violate World Trade Organization rules, constitute a typical act of protectionism and are discriminatory measures that severely harm China’s legitimate rights and interests.”

CANOLA HIT HARD

“New tariffs from China on Canadian canola oil and meal will have a devastating impact on canola farmers and the broader value chain at a time of increased trade and geopolitical uncertainty,” said Chris Davison, Canola Council of Canada (CCC) president and CEO in a statement. “We urge the federal government to immediately engage with China, with a view to resolving this issue.”

In 2024, total exports of Canadian canola seed and products to China were valued at almost $5 billion and included two million tonnes of canola meal, valued at $918 million and tonnes of canola oil, valued at $20.6 million. The tariff rates announced by the State Council Tariff Commission will be prohibitive to the export of Canadian canola oil and meal to China.

“With this announcement Canadian canola farmers are facing an unprecedented situation of trade uncertainty from our two largest export markets only weeks before planting begins,” said Rick White, president and CEO of the Canadian Canola Growers Association. “The impact of the federal government’s trade policy decisions is now playing out at the farmgate, making it imperative that government respond with a plan for financial compensation commensurate with the losses incurred.”

The nearby May canola futures contract on the ICE platform was down its daily $40 per tonne limit in immediate response to the Chinese tariff news on Monday morning, March 10.

CHINA LARGE MARKET FOR CANADIAN PEAS

China is also one of Canada’s largest markets for yellow peas, importing about half a million tonnes of the legume valued at $306 million in 2024, said Pulse Canada. “The Canadian industry values this long-standing and mutually beneficial partnership. We know Chinese customers prefer Canadian peas and want to continue to deal with Canadian suppliers,” said Terry Youzwa, chair of Pulse Canada.

“We believe that the tariffs announced (March 7) on Canadian peas, canola, pork and seafood represent an invitation to negotiate, not a retaliation nor the start of the trade war,” said Greg Cherewyk, president of Pulse Canada in a statement. “Pulse Canada calls on the Canadian Government to immediately engage with China to bring about a swift resolution to these matters. It’s in the best interest of both nations to recognize the positive contributions of agriculture and food to our economic wellbeing.”

Pulse Canada is working with government and industry partners in Canada and China to encourage an urgent meeting of officials and ultimately a successful resolution of issues before there’s an impact on pulse trade.

CHINA TARIFFS ON TOP OF U.S. TRADE UNCERTAINTY

The Grain Growers of Canada (GGC) echoed the concerns raised by the canola and pulse organizations, noting that the mounting pressures could cause a net loss for many farmers.

“With uncertainty mounting with the United States, our largest export market, the last thing grain farmers needed was a trade war with China, our second largest export market,” said Kyle Larkin, executive director of GGC in a release. “Together, the U.S. and China account for over half of all Canadian grain exports — losing access or facing exorbitant tariffs in both markets at once is a threat farmers cannot afford to absorb,” sad Larkin.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) expressed similar sentiments in a statement. “These Chinese tariffs could not have come at a worse time as Canadian producers already combat unfair and unjustified trade actions from the United States,” said Keith Currie, president of the CFA. “It is crucial that the Government of Canada stand firmly with Canadian canola, pork and seafood producers. We urge the Government of Canada to engage in immediate and robust diplomatic efforts with China to address these tariffs and to work closely with affected industries to provide financial compensation commensurate with the losses incurred by farmers who are paying the price.”

China is an important market for agri-food exports and new Chinese tariffs will hurt Canadian farmers and the broader value chain, said the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance (CAFTA). “Given current trade and geopolitical uncertainty for Canada’s agri-food exports, it is imperative that the Government of Canada engage with China as quickly as possible to find a resolution to this issue,” said CAFTA executive director Michael Harvey.

WHEAT GROWERS WEIGH IN

The Wheat Growers of Canada expressed “outrage” over the Chinese tariffs and blamed the trade sanctions on the federal Liberal government while calling for immediate action.

“Instead of standing up for Canadian agriculture and securing stable trade relationships, this government has been asleep at the wheel, too distracted with political games and virtue signaling to notice the economic disaster unfolding before them,” said the Wheat Growers in a news release, adding “farmers and business owners warned the government that its approach to China, including ill-conceived tariffs on electric vehicles and metals, would provoke retaliation.”

The Wheat Growers released a list of demands to the federal government: including calls for financial compensation commensurate with the losses incurred; an end to interprovincial trade barriers so Canadian producers can operate freely and competitively within their own country; investment in critical infrastructure to ensure agricultural exports move efficiently to global markets; leverage trade agreements that diversify Canada’s markets and build credibility with global partners; and

regulatory reform to attract investment, build confidence and ensure a predictable, science-based trade policy.

“This crisis is entirely self-inflicted,” said Gunter Jochum, president of the Wheat Growers. “The Liberal government has made Canada an unreliable trading partner, allowed our international reputation to erode, and now, they’ve put farmers in the crosshairs of a global trade war. While other nations secure new trade deals and expand market access, Canada is losing ground, losing allies and losing business.”

With files from Reuters

The post New Chinese tariffs “devastating” to Canadian ag sector appeared first on Grainews.

However, due to variability in supply, nutrient composition and quality of these feed ingredients, there can be pitfalls if not properly managed. Below are several key areas on which producers can focus when deciding if alternative feeds are a good fit for their farm.

Match feed composition to beef cattle groups

Two of the main components to know when creating a balanced ration for beef cattle are the nutritional composition of the feedstuffs being used and their suitability for the type or group of cattle being fed. Ration-balancing tools, such as CowBytes, allow producers to input feed analysis results and ingredient costs to calculate appropriate rations that safely use alternative feeds and reduce the risk of digestive upsets.

Screenings from cereals, pulses or canola can be cost-effective sources of protein and energy in the diet for mature cattle. Care must be taken, as inconsistency between loads and the potential for toxins call for feed testing to determine the true nutritional value.

In comparison, soyhulls or beet pulp, which are byproducts of processing, typically contain a consistent amount of energy due to having a high level of digestible fibre. This makes them an excellent feed for most classes of cattle.

Feeds such as straw and oat hulls have a poor nutritional composition but can be used as fibre sources to partially substitute for forage in rations for mature cows in early and mid-gestation.

READ MORE: Balancing low cost with enough nutrition

It is recommended to restrict the use of these feeds in the diets of bred heifers — a group that requires a higher plane of nutrition to meet growth and development needs, along with the rising demands of pregnancy. Feeding high levels of straw also increases the risk of impaction.

Protein supplementation is often needed when feeding low- to medium-quality forage-based diets or grazing crop residues. Byproducts such as canola meal, soybean meal or dried distillers’ grains (DDG) are high-quality protein feeds that can be easily fed in multiple feeding scenarios and to all classes of cattle.

Supplementing cows that reach peak lactation in early spring can provide them with the added energy and protein needed to support milk production before pasture turnout.

There can be an increased risk of toxins with some alternative feeds, due to the concentration of nutrients during processing or the presence of certain conditions at harvest and storage. For example, heated or sprouted grains have an elevated risk of moulds and mycotoxins, while cereal screenings increase the danger of ergot toxicity. These contaminants can lead to reduced production performance, fertility issues and abortions in cattle. It is recommended to avoid feeding to bred heifers, pregnant cows or cow-calf pairs. Feed testing is necessary for any suspect feeds.

Think about handling and storage

Consider storage and feeding requirements before purchasing alternative feeds. Having the proper facilities and feeding infrastructure will make incorporating these feeds easier.

Handling can be a challenge when working with high-moisture feeds such as cull potatoes or fruit and vegetable waste. These types of products can freeze in cold weather, making consumption by cattle difficult.

For example, whole, frozen cull potatoes present a choking hazard when fed. To reduce this risk, the potatoes can be chopped using a tub grinder or crushed with equipment such as tractors. However, it is important to keep in mind that once processed, storage time is greatly reduced.

In addition, high-moisture products tend to ferment rapidly, especially when temperatures warm up. This creates potential spoilage issues, so it is recommended to feed quickly unless ensiled.

Feeds such as chaff, oat hulls or screenings can be bulky to transport and store. Covered commodity sheds can help reduce feed losses when compared to outside storage. The storage facilities used should be functional and well-maintained.

These feeds are also dusty and ideally fed as part of a total mixed ration (TMR) with a wet ingredient or water included in the mix.

When thinking of on-farm ration preparation and feed delivery, consider the mixing characteristics of the novel feed, such as particle size, shape and density. Feeds with a fine particle size should be combined with other ingredients in a TMR to allow for the greatest utilization of the product. In contrast, larger particle feeds can be either fed on their own or mixed with other ingredients as part of a balanced ration.

What about costs — do they add up?

It is key to compare feeds on an equal nutrient basis, not simply on purchase price. This allows for a direct comparison between feeds. Consider the scenarios below (nutrient values expressed on a dry matter (DM) basis):

• Two protein sources are available: Source 1 contains 30 per cent protein and costs $350/tonne, while source 2 costs $375/tonne and contains 38 per cent protein. The cost per unit of protein for source 1 is $1.17/kg. In comparison, the cost per unit of protein is 99 cents/kg for source 2. Therefore, although protein source 1 is purchased at a lower price, it will end up costing more to feed the same amount of protein per head per day when compared to source 2.
• Assume corn grain is priced at $248/tonne and contains 88 per cent total digestible nutrients (TDN). The cost per unit of energy is 28 cents/kg. If grain screening pellets are available as an alternative energy source, and they contain 70 per cent TDN, the breakeven price to pay for these pellets would be $195/tonne. It is important to remember that some screening pellets might be fortified with vitamins and minerals which must be considered when doing comparisons.

The BCRC’s interactive calculator for Evaluating the Economic Value of Feeds can help producers determine the value of feeds they are considering for purchase compared to the value of standard feeds. Keep in mind that it is important to use “dry matter” values rather than “as fed” when running cost comparisons.

Considerations when calculating the cost of transportation should include the distance hauled and the physical nature of the product itself. As an example, culled potatoes, culled onions or other fruit and vegetable wastes can have moisture contents ranging from 70 to 90 per cent. This means that one tonne of these feeds at a dry matter of 25 per cent would contain 750 kg of water.

This greatly increases the transportation costs, especially over long distances. In addition, due to the high-moisture content, bedding costs may increase along with a higher risk of digestive upsets and buildup of manure tags.

Carefully manage inclusion of alternative feeds

Local alternative feeds can be effective and economical additions to beef cattle rations. However, careful management is required to avoid potential problems and to ensure the nutritional requirements of the type of cattle being fed are met.

The post Do your homework on alternative feeds appeared first on Grainews.

Meanwhile, StatCan found the July soybean crush was slightly lower than in July 2022.

The federal agency pegged the canola crush for last month at 961,683 tonnes, up 24.25 per cent from the previous July. The previous July record was 854,510 tonnes in 2019; the overall record of 957,952 tonnes was in March 2021.

The amount of oil produced this past July rose 24.2 per cent at 402,886 tonnes, but well short of the record of 416,849 tonnes in March 2021.

Canola meal produced increased 22.5 per cent July over July at 567,153 tonnes. That as well made for a new record, besting the 545,992 tonnes in March 2023.

At 151,621 tonnes, StatCan found a 5.3 per cent decline in the country’s soybean crush. That resulted in a 6.5 per cent drop in oil produced at 28,497 tonnes and meal produced was down 5.4 per cent at 118,483 tonnes.

Table: Canada’s July crush, in metric tonnes. Source: StatCan.

The post July canola crush sets new records appeared first on Grainews.

“A lot of guys are fairly caught up with purchasing,” said Mike Fleischhauer of Eagle Commodities Inc. in Lethbridge. “You see the prices of wheat and barley start to trickle down a little bit. Corn’s down a little bit, as well. There’s still a pile of unit trains of corn coming down into southern Alberta, but I haven’t seen a real big uptick in people looking to purchase barley and wheat.”

Fleischhauer also mentioned that feed barley prices are at $420-$425 per tonne ($9.14-$9.25 per bushel) in southern Alberta, compared to $440-$443/tonne ($9.58-$9.65/bu.) one week earlier.

The high-delivered bid for feed barley in Alberta as of Wednesday was $9.58/bu., steady over the past month, according to Prairie Ag Hotwire.

“I think this year until new crop is going to be kind of shaky, up and down, I don’t know where it’s going to go. In terms of price, $420 (per tonne) is a pretty good price at this time,” Fleischhauer said.

Corn is putting pressure on barley and wheat prices, but other grains are making their way into feedlots, he said.

“There’s been a little bit of an influx of oats coming in lately. I’ve heard some of the feedlots are bringing in oats, for sure,” he said. “Lots of canola meal. There are guys who are buying that as opposed to DDGs.”

The high-delivered bids for feed barley in Saskatchewan and Manitoba are $8 (steady from last month) and $7.77/bu. (down five cents), respectively, according to Prairie Ag Hotwire.

The high-delivered bid for Alberta feed wheat is $12.11/bu. (down 27 cents), while in both Manitoba and Saskatchewan, they are $11/bu. (steady and 50 cents lower, respectively).

— Adam Peleshaty reports for MarketsFarm from Stonewall, Man.

The post Feed weekly outlook: Barley, wheat prices continue downward appeared first on Grainews.

The North American arm of Rotterdam-based Viterra said Monday it’s in the “feasibility” stage of designing and finalizing plans for what it bills as the “world’s largest integrated canola crush facility” in the northeast of Regina, about seven km from its downtown head office.

Construction would begin in early 2022, toward a late 2024 startup producing fully-refined vegetable oils for food-grade and biodiesel-grade end-users, the company said.

The Viterra plant’s targeted crush capacity, initially, would be 2.5 million tonnes of canola per year.

That figure would put it ahead of Winnipeg rival Richardson International’s plans for its existing canola plant at Yorkton, Sask., about 185 km northeast of Regina. Richardson last month announced a major expansion to be completed by early 2024, bringing the Yorkton plant’s annual capacity to about 2.2 million tonnes.

Asked Monday about the total cost of the project as proposed, Kyle Jeworski, Viterra’s CEO for North America, said the company is “continuing to refine” that figure, but added it would be the company’s “largest single investment in a site in Canada ever.”

“Oilseed crush demand is expected to continue strengthening in the long term, given continued demand growth for canola oil in food usage, as well as increases in meal consumption in animal feed markets,” Viterra said Monday in a release.

The Regina plant also “will play a key role in supplying the feedstock required for renewable fuel production,” which the company said would support the federal government’s planned Clean Fuel Standard.

Viterra already operates three North American oilseed crush plants — at Becancour, Que., Ste. Agathe, Man. and Warden, Washington — all of which were built by previous owners. The Regina plant would mark “the first time that we are constructing a greenfield facility” for canola crushing, Jeworski said.

Putting the Regina plant’s scope and size in perspective, Jeworski said, “if this facility was an export destination, it would be larger than our Japanese market for seed, larger than our Mexican market for seed… in an average year it would be our second-largest destination.”

The new plant would also feature “the latest technology,” he said, in terms of handling efficiency and limting emissions.

Unlike the Ste. Agathe and Warden plants, which specialize in expeller-pressed canola oil, the Regina plant would be a “traditional” hexane-extraction canola plant, he said.

Asked about Viterra’s plans against the current market picture for canola, Jeworski said that “anytime you continue to add demand, I think that’s good for the farmer; I think it’s good for Canada, in terms of continuing to diversify our markets — and we’re diversifying markets with the safest market in the world, which is our own.”

‘All directions’

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, in a separate release, hailed Viterra’s announcement as “align(ing) with our Growth Plan goals, bringing us to our target to crush 75 per cent of the canola produced in our province at home in Saskatchewan.”

Completion of the project depends on “successful negotiation and finalization of various permits, licensing, agreements with third parties and final approvals both internally and externally,” Viterra said.

The project site, Jeworski said, is on a parcel on the edge of Regina for which the company has been working with city officials for “a considerable amount of time.”

For this kind of project, the company is looking at “access to sufficient labour, which Regina has, but on top of that (the site) has excellent access for both road and rail,” Jeworski said, noting the province’s recent investments in bypass infrastructure, which would allow the plant to “access canola seed from all directions very effectively.”

Viterra’s announcement comes just days after the Canadian arm of agrifood firm Cargill announced plans for its own smaller canola crush plant at a not-yet-decided location in the Regina area, for completion in early 2024. Cargill on Thursday also pledged upgrades for its own existing crush plants at Camrose, Alta. and Clavet, Sask.

Those oilseed sector announcements also follow Federated Co-operatives’ (FCL) decision earlier this month to buy the assets of biodiesel processor True North Renewable Fuels.

The co-operative, however, has objected to Regina city council’s $4 million land sale for what turns out to be the Viterra plant — just to the north of FCL’s existing fuel refinery complex.

Writing April 11 to Regina Mayor Sandra Masters, FCL vice-president Pam Skotnitsky said that land sale “jeopardizes our planned investments and would force us to select a location apart from the city of Regina.”

FCL’s April 9 announcement, Skotnitsky said, had “highlighted our interest in locating a renewable diesel facility adjacent to the Co-op Refinery Complex.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Viterra plans major canola crusher for Regina appeared first on Grainews.

Aside from price, I can formulate canola meal and/or soybean meal almost interchangeably in my lactating dairy diets — both as primary sources of crude protein (CP) and a somewhat secondary source of rumen undegradable or ‘bypass’ protein’ (RUP). That’s because canola meal has a protein content of about 41 per cent and a bypass protein of 30-35 per cent (UIP per cent, CP), which in turn has a 75 per cent degradability in the lower gut.

These nutrient specs are comparable to soybean meal, with a consistent protein content of 51 per cent and a bypass protein level of 35 per cent (UIP per cent, CP), which is nearly all digested (94 per cent) in the lower gut. Finally, both ingredients have a measured dietary energy (Nel) value of 1.80-1.90 Mcal/kg, which is slightly less than corn and cereal grains.

Some researchers and fellow nutritionists might take exception to these nutrient values, since many of them believe canola meal is a much better choice over soybean meal in lactating dairy diets. They often argue that it is no longer valid that soluble protein in most feedstuffs like canola meal is equated to rumen-degradable protein, but a portion of soluble protein actually adds to the value of their bypass protein. As a result, canola meal should have a higher RUP value of 44 per cent, which is higher than soybean meal’s RUP. Furthermore, these people say that older formulating models compute the indigestible lignin of canola meal in error, which also underestimates canola meal’s dietary energy value as mentioned above.

As good supporting evidence, the University of Saskatchewan (2017) reported a literature review of 49 studies in which canola meal replaced a group of commonly used protein sources and soybean meal in lactating dairy diets at up to 20 per cent (dm basis). Cows fed canola meal as dietary protein replacement (crude protein and bypass) had increased milk production — 0.7 kg per day (soybean meal) and 1.4 kg (other protein sources). In some of these trials where soybean meal was replaced with canola meal, milk urea nitrogen (MUN) levels were lower and overall feed efficiency of the dairy diet improved.

In addition, South Dakota University (2009) formulated canola meal as a total and a partial protein substitute of corn dried distiller’s grains with solubles (DDGS-30 per cent crude protein, 62 per cent bypass protein) in a common diet for 12 early/multi-lactation dairy cows. The respective treatments were 100, 66, 33, and 0 per cent replacement protein, which resulted in milk production and its components to be similar for all such treatments. The researchers concluded that canola meal was a suitable replacement for DDGS in most lactation dairy diets.

Such evidence might even convince me that canola is a more nutritious protein source than soybean meal or DDGS for good milk production. However, its wider acceptance by dairy farmers is likely based upon its economic advantage compared to these protein feed ingredients to make milk. I often calculate the cost of canola meal protein as well as its bypass protein (RUP) and compare them with those of soybean meal and DDGS:

• Canola ml protein (36 per cent CP, as fed) = $ 465 mt/.36 = $ 1,292/mt vs Soybean ml (47 per cent CP, as fed) = $690/.47 = $ 1468/mt
• Canola ml RUP (35 per cent of CP, as fed) = $ 465 mt/.36/.35 = $ 3,690/mt vs Soybean ml RUP (35 per cent of CP, as fed) = $690/.47/.35 = $ 4194/mt
• Canola ml protein (36 per cent CP, as fed) = $ 465 mt/.36 = $ 1,292 mt vs DDGS (28 per cent CP, as fed) = $410/.28 = $ 1464/mt
• Canola ml RUP (35 per cent of CP, as fed) = $465 mt/.36/.35 = $ 3,690 mt vs DDGS RUP (60 per cent of CP, as fed) = $410/.28/.60 = $2,440/mt

These are straightforward feed costs to review when formulating canola meal as a nutritious yet economical feed ingredient in lactating dairy diets. In a recent dairy feeding program I revised, I substituted one kilogram of soybean meal ($0.69) for 1.2 kg of canola meal ($0.49) in the lactating dairy diet and saved about $0.20 per lactating cow per day. For this 200-milking cow dairy, this little change saved the dairy producer — about $1,200 per month.

The post Canola meal as a dairy ration can be excellent soybean replacement appeared first on Grainews.

In Saskatoon on Wednesday, federal Industry Minister Navdeep Bains announced the Protein Industries Canada (PIC) supercluster has approved a new $27.6 million project to breed high-protein canola hybrids for both human consumption and animal feed, using gene-editing technology.

Participants in the new PIC-backed project also include ag chem and seed firm Corteva Agriscience, the Canadian arm of agrifood giant Bunge, and Calgary plant-based ingredients processor Botaneco.

Corteva on Wednesday hailed the effort as “the first commercial plant-breeding project focused specifically on canola protein quality improvement.”

High-protein seed genetics “will transform Canadian canola to be both a high-value oil and a high-value meal crop,” Corteva Canada president Bryce Eger said in that company’s release.

The new seed varieties to come out of the project “are expected to be well suited for both traditional processing methods like crushing and newer technologies like the one being developed through the supercluster’s first supported project announced in June,” the government said in its release.

The project will bring in genetics from Corteva’s breeding programs as well as from public-sector sources such as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, PIC said.

Bunge, meanwhile, will process the high-protein canola, “resulting in high-protein meal to be used in poultry and swine feeding studies to quantify animal performance,” and will also evaluate new end-use markets.

High-protein canola produced through the project will also be used in Botaneco’s processing platforms, creating protein concentrates for use in aquaculture studies as well as protein isolates for human food testing.

“By investing in breeding to improve protein and reduce fibre, we will increase the value of Canadian canola and open up new markets for food and feed applications, resulting in higher demand and prices for the meal,” PIC CEO Bill Greuel said, noting the meal is “traditionally sold at a discount.”

Being able to offer a high-protein and reduced-fibre meal “will allow us to sell into local feed markets where we currently struggle to compete,” Ryan Law, North America canola commercial manager for Bunge, said in the same release.

The feds are investing up to $13.6 million in the new project through PIC, while $14.05 million will come from other consortium partners, PIC noted.

Canola R+D has generally focused on yield and traits such as pod shatter and disease resistance, Corteva said — traits that are “critical to profitable and sustainable production.”

This breeding program, however, “will place Canadian canola researchers in a global leadership position and create an entirely new canola ecosystem,” the company said.

New isolates

The goal of ramping up canola’s overall protein content dovetails with another project in which PIC announced an investment separately the previous Friday.

In Winnipeg that day, Bains and senior local MP Jim Carr announced up to $9.5 million in PIC backing for a project to commercialize “new highly-soluble, highly-functional pea and canola protein isolates.”

The new isolates to come out of the project “will eliminate the grittiness experienced with less soluble proteins and will improve the flavour profiles of plant-based products, including in plant-protein beverages and meat alternatives,” the government said.

Merit Functional Foods, Pitura Seeds, The Winning Combination and the Manitoba Food Development Centre are collaborating on the project, which is expected to use patented technology from Burcon NutraScience to produce the new protein isolates “with more than 90 per cent purity.”

The PIC investment “will be matched at least dollar for dollar by industry and other partners,” the government said.

Merit is building a plant at Winnipeg’s CentrePort to produce plant-based proteins; The Winning Combination, another Winnipeg company, processes natural health products and dietary supplements and “will help Merit assess pea and canola functionality and stability.” The Manitoba Food Development Centre at Portage la Prairie is a fee-for-service agency which handles R+D and commercialization work for Manitoba agrifoods and ingredients.

Pitura Seeds, based near Winnipeg at Domain, Man., will use its seed cleaning plant to develop cleaning standards to “achieve optimal protein and quality levels for canola and peas,” and will also test varieties for the best “agronomic fit” for Prairie growers. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Supercluster backing canola protein production appeared first on Grainews.

The federal agency issued its monthly crush numbers on Thursday with 829,778 tonnes of canola crushed in August, down 2.89 per cent from July’s crush. However, August’s crush was the second most so far in 2019.

Of August’s crush came 362,351 tonnes of canola oil produced. Although a slip of 3.05 per cent from July, August’s production was also the second-largest monthly total this year.

There were 465,424 tonnes of canola meal produced in August, down 2.62 per cent from July. August’s amount ranked as the third most in 2019.

Crush margins in August provided by ICE Futures ranged from $72.19 to $90.53 per tonne, with an average of $81.70. The margins are calculated by ICE using a formula developed by the Canadian Oilseed Processors Association.

Daily crush margins are available on the MarketsFarm website.

Table: Canola crush in 2019 (tonnes)

Source: Crushing statistics of major oilseeds, Statistics Canada

The post Canada’s canola crush down slightly in August appeared first on Grainews.