Breaking free from the chains of the past Where
truth moves faster than a Holstein calf No law
waiting on some printed page We're charting new
ground in the digital age From genomic codes
to robot facts We cut through the noise, no hold
them back not your daddy's dairy news tonight
we're sparking Welcome back to the Bullvine Podcast,
where we cut through the dairy industry noise
to get you the insights that actually matter
for your operation. Today, we are doing a deep
dive into a brand new feature piece from www
.thebullvine .com. Yeah, and this one is heavy.
We're looking at Canada's 20 most used Holstein
sires right now. Right, and we're not just reading
the catalog descriptions here. We are jumping
right into a structural issue that is actively
reshaping the bottom line of... Well, almost
every dairy operation out there today. Including
yours. If you're listening to this in the tractor
or driving to the feed store, you need to think
about your own herd for a minute. Exactly. You
spend hours analyzing proofs, calculating matings,
investing heavily in these elite, highly recommended
genetics. Because you're choosing the sires that
mathematically promise to secure your operation's
future, right? Right. But if we look past the
shiny headline numbers printed on those semen
order forms. Which is what everyone looks at
first. Of course it is. But there is a very high
probability that those exact elite genetics are
quietly siphoning tens of thousands of dollars
from your profitability. It's an invisible leak.
That's the best way to describe it. It does not
show up as a line item on your monthly expense
report. And that is precisely what makes it so
incredibly dangerous. So the mission for today's
deep dive is to decode the newly modernized Lactonet
subindexes. We want to strip away the marketing
hype and equip you with the raw data you actually
need to protect your farm's margins. Because
the gap between what is being marketed in those
glossy AI catalogs and what is biologically materializing
out in the barn, I mean, it's never been whiter.
It really hasn't. So let's set the stage here
with the problem identification. The scale of
this genetic footprint is just staggering. Yeah,
we are not evaluating a fringe group of noosh
bulls here. Now, these 20 sires, just 20 individual
bulls, are responsible for producing 23 % of
all registered Canadian Holsteins in 2025. Almost
a quarter of the entire national replacement
crop. Tracing back to 20 animals, they're averaging
2 ,940 daughters each. Which is massive. And
when a single genetic profile is replicated that
heavily across the national herd, any inherent
flaw is magnified exponentially. But on paper,
Jake, or sorry, on paper... These bulls look
absolutely untouchable. They do. They average
the 96th percentile for the Lifetime Profitability
Index, the LPI. Right. An average LPI of 3 ,568.
And to put that 96 percentile into perspective
for your operation, it suggests these animals
represent the absolute elite echelon of breed
progress. You buy that semen thinking you're
getting the best of the best. But when you cross
-reference that elite overall ranking with their
specific trait performance, the paradox becomes
glaring. It's a massive contradiction. Those
exact same bulls, the ones dominating the 96
percentile for lifetime profitability. are sitting
at a dismal 31st percentile for reproduction.
31st percentile. Let that sink in. They are mathematically
elite, but fundamentally below average at getting
cows pregnant. Which, out in the real world,
in a commercial dairy environment, female fertility
is the baseline requirement for revenue generation.
If you can't get her bred, nothing else matters.
Exactly. A cow that fails to conceive, extends
her days open, drops in lifetime milk yield efficiency,
and... And she fails to produce a replacement
heifer. Right. When I first pulled the data for
this deep dive to see how an elite LPI could
even coexist with such poor fertility, I actually
had to review the December 2025 lactanate proofsheets
multiple times. I thought the data was corrupted.
Because if you just look at the top line averages
for this top 20 group, they present an incredibly
compelling package for any breeder. 92 % rank
for production traits. Yep, 97 % rank for longevity
and type. Pro dollars metric sitting around 2008,
which is roughly the 93rd percentile. So it is
incredibly easy to see why these sires are dominating
semen sales. If you're sitting at the kitchen
table making rapid decisions based on the bold
print, you're naturally going to load your tank
with these genetics. You'd be crazy not to. Based
on the old way we looked at things, historically
that singular LPI figure served as the ultimate
shorthand for a bull's genetic value. It was
the one number to rule them all. Exactly. It
was a blended metric that farmers trusted implicitly.
But the landscape fundamentally shifted in April
2025. Right, when Lactonet modernized the LPI
framework. Yeah, they separated the traditional
index into six standardized sub -indexes. And
the intention behind that modernization was good,
right? Yeah. It was to provide breeders with
a highly granular, transparent view of what a
sire actually brings to a mating. Instead of
just obscuring all the individual trait deficiencies
inside one massive aggregated number. But the
introduction of those sub -indexes is exactly
what shatters the illusion of the flawless elite
sire. It's a harsh reality check. Very harsh.
When you look at those six specific pillars,
17 out of the top 20 sires in this high -use
group rank strictly below the breed average for
reproduction. Below the 50th percentile. 17 out
of 20. When a farmer is paying a premium for
a 96th percentile bull, they assume a baseline
of competence across the board. Of course they
do. So how does the math allow a sire to perform
that poorly in reproduction while maintaining
an elite overall rank? It requires a highly specific
algorithmic skew. That's the secret sauce, right?
The algorithm is heavily weighted to reward production
volume and physical frame, and it actively masks
the deficiencies in health and fertility. Let's
look at Brian Van Dormaal's recent paper in the
Interpol Bulletin. He breaks down the mechanics
of this weighting perfectly. Yeah, the modernized
formula caps the combined weight of health, reproduction,
milkability, and environment at just 28%. All
four of those combined are only 28%. Right. Meanwhile,
the vast majority of the index is controlled
by just two categories. Production carries a
40 % weight, and longevity and type carries 32%.
So together, production and type dictate 72 %
of a sire's final LPI score. The system is structurally
designed to prioritize milk yield and confirmation
above absolutely everything else. Which means
the casualty list extends well beyond just reproduction.
Let's look at the raw data. The bull vine extracted
for the group averages across those bottom four
sub -indexes. It's not pretty. For health and
welfare, 13 of the 20 bulls sit below the breed
average. Reproduction, as we noted, 17 of 20
below average, languishing down at the 31st percentile.
Milkability. 12 out of 20 are below average.
And environmental impact has 15 out of 20 falling
below the midpoint. So a producer trying to build
a resilient, self -sustaining herd is unknowingly
pulling from a genetic pool where the majority
of the highest use sires are negative on health,
negative on fertility, and negative on milking
speed. It's incredibly frustrating from a farmer's
perspective. And this mathematical skew directly
highlights a deeply documented biological complex
that we've known about for decades. The negative
correlation between female fertility traits and
extreme milk yield or angular conformation. Exactly.
Dairy cattle possess a finite amount of energy
to partition every single day. They only have
so much gas in the tank. Right. And when genetics
push a cow to produce extreme volumes of milk,
the physiological demand is immense. The energy
required for high -level lactation inevitably
forces a metabolic trade -off. And the reproductive
system is typically the first to suffer. Always.
Luteinizing hormone pulses weaken, the follicular
phase is compromised, and conception rates just
drop off a cliff. So a bull can have daughters
that consistently struggle to conceive, require
multiple expensive services, extend their lactation
curves into highly unprofitable territory. But
because those same daughters produce massive
volumes of milk and exhibit high type scores,
the sheer volume of their production mathematically
overpowers their fertility failures within that
LPI formula. It's the equivalent of dropping
a massive high horsepower engine into a chassis
with failing brakes. Great analogy. The top speed
looks incredible on paper, but the daily operation
is highly inefficient and prone to breakdown.
And that 72 % waiting for production and type
ensures that these negative correlations in fertility
simply do not generate enough drag to drop these
bulls out of the elite percentiles. The LPI remains
artificially buoyant. Exactly. But to play devil's
advocate here, we have to acknowledge why farmers
are actively choosing to purchase these genetics
in such massive quantities. Dairy producers are
operating sophisticated businesses with incredibly
tight margins. They aren't just making arbitrary
selections. No, there is a tangible, immediate
market signal driving these semen orders, and
it revolves entirely around the changing structure
of milk checks. Follow the money. Always follow
the money. The primary driver right now is components
and milk marketing premiums. Let's analyze the
production breakdown of these top 20 bulls. They
are delivering exceptional value in the specific
metrics processors are paying for today. Yeah,
the group averages a confirmation score of plus
9 .7, securing the 94th percentile. On the component
side, they are pushing plus 88 kilograms of fat.
Which is a massive plus 0 .40 % deviation. And
they're adding plus 58 kilograms of protein.
A plus 0 .21 % deviation. So if your milk check
is heavily incentivized for butterfat and protein
percentages, these bulls represent an immediate
revenue boost in the bulk tank. You're going
to pay more in your next check. But drilling
down into the specific physical traits reveals
a really bizarre anomaly within that elite confirmation
score. Oh, the mammary system. Yeah. Despite
averaging the 94th percentile for overall type,
the mammary systems for this group averaged just
plus 5 .8. Placing them in the 81st percentile.
And it gets worse. One of the bulls in this highly
utilized top 20 list actually carries a minus
3 for mammary systems. Minus 3. Right. A decade
ago, a minus 3 udder score would have functionally
disqualified a sire from widespread commercial
use. Absolutely, regardless of his production.
But today, breeders are actively choosing to
accept subpar udders and poor reproduction to
secure specific marketing traits. We are witnessing
a massive rapid shift in breeding priorities,
specifically regarding the casein and polled
revolution. The data drop detailing this transition
over just the last two years is totally staggering.
If we compare the 2021 to 2023 registration data
to this current 2025 data, the representation
of A2A2 genetics among top sires has surged from
45 % to roughly 70%. Almost three -quarters of
the top bulls. And B .D. cappucasian representation
has skyrocketed from 19 % to 50%. And the use
of homozygous pole genetics, the PP gene that
ensures calves are born naturally hornless, That
has nearly quadrupled. Dividing from 4 % to 15
% of the elite sire pool. So breeders are no
longer treating caseins and polled traits as
secondary bonuses. They have become primary selection
criteria. Because the economics are clear. Right.
BB kappa casein fundamentally alters the structure
of the casein micelle in the milk, resulting
in a firmer cheese curd and higher overall cheese
yield. Processors demand this efficiency and
they pay premiums for it. And A2 milk has evolved
from a niche dietary product into a major consumer
-facing marketing strategy. Then you add in the
shift toward pole genetics. That directly addresses
both tightening animal welfare regulations and
the severe labor shortages on farms. It completely
eliminates the time, cost, and stress of dehorning
calves. The source material explicitly points
out that continuing to dehorn calves in 2026
is rapidly becoming a management choice rather
than a genetic constraint. And the Sire usage
list proves this unequivocally. The number one
most used bull on this entire list is quote -unquote
A2P2. He provides a complete modern package.
He is daughter proven, A2A2, homozygous pulled,
and maintains elite confirmation. Just five years
ago, finding a bull with that specific stacked
profile sitting at the absolute top of the national
usage list would have been considered impossible.
Further down the list, sitting at number 11 is
Right Stuff PP. The prominence of these sires
confirms that homozygous polled and casein -heavy
genetics have entirely broken out of the niche
market. They are dictating mainstream genetic
flow. Producers have made a calculated decision.
They are willing to forgive a 31st percentile
reproduction score, and they are willing to overlook
a minus -3 mammary system, as long as the bull
guarantees A2 -A2 milk, polled calves, and elite
fat and protein percentages. But, and this is
where the reality check hits the hardest. This
hyper -focused selection for specific traits
is accelerating a much more insidious problem.
The silent killer of dairy profitability. If
we follow the money. The most alarming data point
in this entire analysis from the bull vine points
directly to an inbreeding crisis that is actively
eroding farm profitability. Let's talk about
the average inbreeding coefficient of these top
20 sires. It is an astonishing 11 .9%. 11 .9.
Out of the 20 bulls dominating the national herd,
only three possess an inbreeding coefficient
below 10%. For context, the average inbreeding
level for all Canadian Holstein Huffers born
in 2024 was already high at 9 .9. 9%. And the
national breed average has been steadily creeping
up by approximately a quarter of a percent every
single year since the widespread adoption of
genomics around 2010. But these 20 sires, the
animals responsible for 23 % of the entire upcoming
generation, are carrying inbreeding loads nearly
two full percentage points above the current
national average. We are aggressively concentrating
a very, very narrow genetic pool. And the economic
devastation of this concentration is not theoretical.
It's not just a warning on a spreadsheet that
you can ignore. No, global research has comprehensively
validated the threat of inbreeding depression.
This is a worldwide biological reality. Geneticist
Dr. Chad Daychow at Penn State has extensively
tracked this in the United States. He noted that
the U .S. Holstein population currently averages
around 8 % inbreeding. With young genomic bulls
frequently pushing into the 9 to 10 % range as
breeders aggressively line breed to stack those
elite traits we just talked about. The physical
manifestation of this inbreeding depression has
been quantified by several major international
institutions. Let's look at the Wageningen University
study in the Netherlands. Huge study. They analyzed
the lactation records of nearly 39 ,000 first
parity Dutch Holsteins. The researchers established
a clear baseline and found that every single
1 % increase in an animal's genomic inbreeding
resulted in a 36 .3 kilogram drop in 305 -day
milk yield. It simultaneously lengthened the
calving interval and increased the somatic cell
score. Meaning the cows gave less milk, took
longer to get pregnant, and had higher rates
of utter inflammation. A triple threat to your
margins. And there's a separate 2023 analysis
out of the University of Parma in Italy. They
look at nearly 28 ,000 Italian Holsteins and
found even more severe penalties. Yeah, they
confirmed that every 1 % increase in inbreeding
slashed 305 -day milk yield by approximately
61 kilograms, while also driving down total fat
and protein yields. Which is the profound irony
here. Producers are aggressively purchasing these
heavily inbred elite LPI bulls specifically to
boost their component yields. But the biological
drag of the inbreeding they are introducing actively
suppresses the expression of those exact traits.
It creates a genetic treadmill. Exactly. A producer
is continually forced to select for higher and
higher component proofs just to offset the biological
yield suppression caused by the rising inbreeding
levels. To understand the direct financial impact
of this cycle, we have to look to the foundational
economic models built by researchers Smith, Cassell,
and Pearson at Virginia Tech. They analyzed an
incredible data set of over 2 .6 million lactation
records. When they isolated the registered cow
population, where pedigree tracking is meticulous
and the true accumulation of inbreeding is highly
accurate, the financial penalty was completely
undeniable. Let's break down the math for the
listener because this is where it hits the wallet.
When adjusted for current inflation and modern
milk pricing, the Virginia Tech models demonstrate
that registered cows lose between $40 and $46,
an absolute lifetime profit, for every 1 % increase
in inbreeding. And the critical takeaway from
their research is that these economic losses
are strictly linear. The jump from 3 % to 4 %
inbreeding costs you the exact same $46 as the
jump from 11 % to 12%. There is no biological
ceiling where a cow suddenly adapts to the inbreeding
load and the financial bleeding stops. So let's
apply that linear loss to the reality of utilizing
these top 20 sires today. If your mating program
utilizes these 11 .9 % inbred sires and pushes
the resulting daughters just two percentage points
above the current 9 .5 % baseline, the math is
unforgiving. It represents an $80 to $110 lifetime
profit drag on every single cow in your herd.
Take a moment to scale that $110 penalty across
your own operation. If you are milking a 200
cow herd, that seemingly minor two percentage
point increase in inbreeding translates directly
to between $16 ,000 and $22 ,000 in completely
invisible economic losses. You will never receive
an invoice from your accountant labeled inbreeding
penalty. No, it manifests entirely in the shadows.
It looks like higher cull rates. Cows failing
to breed back on the third service. Heifers lacking
vigor. And milk checks that consistently fall
short of what the herd's genetic proofs indicated
they should be producing. This is a staggering
hidden tax on operational margins, and it inevitably
leads to a critical question about information
asymmetry. If the global data is this definitive,
and the financial penalties of inbreeding and
poor reproduction are this severe, why are producers
completely blind to this when they open a semen
catalog to make their genetic purchasing decisions?
The answer lies in the massive disconnect between
the raw data that exists and the curated data
that is actively presented to you, the buyer.
The irony is that the raw data is completely
public. Lactanid is not hiding the reality of
these bulls. They provide highly sophisticated,
unbiased tools completely free of charge. Any
producer can log in and access Compass, the personalized
LPI or PLPI system, and a highly accurate inbreeding
calculator. The structural problem occurs at
the point of sale. When you open a glossy catalog
from an AI organization like EastGen, or when
a sales rep guides you through their proprietary
software like Cemexworks, the presentation of
the data is intensely curated. The AI companies
design their interfaces to highlight their absolute
best marketing angles. The default sorting in
these catalogs prioritizes the traditional GLPI
and pro dollars, printing those aggregated numbers
in massive bold fonts. They aggressively badge
sires with logos promoting A2A2 homozygous polled
status and whether the bull has ideal teat placement
to be deemed robot ready. But if a producer wants
to evaluate the subindex rank for health and
welfare or verify the percentile for reproduction,
they are forced to hunt through the fine print
at the bottom of the page. Assuming the AI company
chose to print those specific sub -indexes at
all. It is the exact equivalent of walking onto
a car lot and being sold a truck based entirely
on its horsepower rating and the premium leather
interior, while the fact that the transmission
has a 70 % failure rate is buried in a footnote
in the owner's manual. That's spot on. The AI
catalogs rely on the perception that a high overall
LPI implies functional competence across the
board. They are actively selling the myth of
the no -hole sire. an animal that supposedly
excels at production, type, health, and fertility
simultaneously. Which brings us to the contrarian
take from the bull vine analysis. They directly
debunk this myth using an August 2025 case study
of a bull named Apollo PP. Apollo PP proves that
true genetic balance is exceedingly rare. He
was marketed as the ultimate achievement in pole
genetics. He ranked as the highest homozygous
pole sire in the breed, boasting a massive 3
,924 LPI. He carried a 99th percentile rank for
longevity and type and successfully hit five
out of the six modernized subindexes above the
50th percentile breed average. On paper, utilizing
a sire with those metrics seems like the easiest
decision a breeder could make. Yet, despite being
the absolute pinnacle of polled breeding and
dominating five subindexes, Apollo PP is still
plummeted to the 41st percentile on reproduction.
If the absolute best, most highly engineered
polled sire in the global database still carries
a significant biological hole in his fertility
profile, you have to assume that the average
sire sitting in the top 20 usage list possesses
multiple severe deficiencies. when you finally
force the AI software to display all six columns.
The perfect, flawlessly balanced bull simply
does not exist in the current high -production
paradigm. So we have clearly outlined a systemic
vulnerability. The reliance on aggregated LPI
numbers is actively masking severely depressed
reproduction and health traits. The aggressive
push for milk components is driving inbreeding
to levels that cost herds tens of thousands of
dollars in hidden losses. And the primary point
of sale marketing materials are designed to obscure
these exact weaknesses. But the purpose of understanding
this data is not to panic. It's to gain leverage
over your own genetic program. Let's talk solutions.
The source analysis provides a very explicit,
highly practical... Kitchen table strategy, broken
down by specific timelines. Actionable insights,
so you know exactly how to operationalize this
information. Effective genetic management requires
shifting from passive reliance on marketing to
active, intentional data auditing. All right,
so let's say a farmer just finished milking and
is driving to the feed store. What are the specific
things they need to do, starting immediately?
The strategy begins with action you can execute
this week. The very first step is to conduct
a comprehensive audit of your semen tank. Log
into the LactaNet database and manually pull
the six -part modernized subindex breakdown for
every single sire currently in your inventory.
You must force yourself to look past the overall
LPI and evaluate the structural pillars supporting
that number. The specific actionable instruction
here is to flag any sire in your tank that falls
below the 50 % mark on three or more of the bottom
four subindexes. Specifically... Health, reproduction,
milkability, and environment. Now... The bull
vine analysis makes a crucial caveat here. Identifying
a flagged bull does not mean you immediately
dump his semen in the trash. You already paid
for those genetics. Yeah. But it changes how
you deploy them. You are no longer flying blind.
If you have a bull sitting in the 30th percentile
for reproduction, you now know absolutely not
to use him on a cow that has a history of cystic
ovaries or requires multiple services. You manage
the risk by isolating his weaknesses. Okay, so
that's step one. Once the immediate tank audit
is complete, the focus shifts to a medium -term
strategy. Ideally implemented over the next 90
days or prior to your next major semen purchase.
This phase requires utilizing the Lactonet inbreeding
calculator to run projections on every planned
mating. You need to establish a strict, non -negotiable
inbreeding ceiling for your herd. Given that
the 2024 heifer average is hovering around 9
.9%, setting a hard ceiling of 9 .5 % is a highly
defensible, mathematically sound starting point
to immediately halt the accumulation of genetic
drag. But implementing that 9 .5 % ceiling forces
a very real operational trade -off. Because the
most elite LPI bulls are heavily concentrated
and highly inbred, enforcing a strict inbreeding
cap means you will likely have to consciously
bypass the bulls at the very top of the LPI rankings
in order to protect your herd's genetic diversity.
This requires a fundamental shift in perspective.
You have to evaluate genetics like a risk actuary
rather than just chasing the highest theoretical
yield. A sire sitting at a 3 ,400 LPI with a
9 % inbreeding projection, backed by solid health
and fertility subindexes, will mathematically
deliver significantly more actual, realized lifetime
profit to your dairy than a headline -grabbing
3 ,800 LPI sire that pushes your mating to 13
% inbreeding. The theoretical advantage gained
in the LPI index is entirely consumed by the
linear financial penalty of inbreeding depression.
Which brings the math full circle back to the
$16 ,000 to $22 ,000 in invisible losses we quantified
earlier. A slightly lower LPI is a cheap insurance
policy against catastrophic inbreeding depression.
Absolutely. So moving to the long -term positioning,
looking ahead to April 2027 and beyond, the strategy
shifts toward verifying your current decisions.
Long -term management requires establishing a
closed -loop feedback system within your own
barn. When the first born 2025 calves from these
heavily used top 20 sires hit the ground and
eventually transition into the milking string,
you must actively audit their physical performance
against their genomic predictions. track their
real -world health events, monitor their specific
conception rates during their first lactation,
and analyze their somatic cell counts. You need
to verify if the daughters are actually overcoming
the poor reproduction percentiles of their sires,
or if those genetic deficiencies are manifesting
exactly as the subindex is predicted. It is about
building your own internal reality check, rather
than trusting the catalog. And regarding the
massive industry shift toward caseins and pole
genetics, the strategic advice is to treat the
current market averages as your new baseline.
With 70 % of the top sires now carrying A2A2
and 50 % carrying BB -kappa casein, you no longer
have to compromise on LPI to secure these premiums.
You can comfortably build a casein forward, polled
herd today, utilizing these new baselines as
your floor, provided you maintain strict oversight
of the inbreeding accumulation. The final, and
perhaps most critical, actionable insight involves
changing the dynamic with your AI representative.
When you sit down at the kitchen table to negotiate
your next genetic lineup, you have to assume
control of the metrics being discussed. You must
explicitly demand to see all six modernized subindexes
for every single bull they present. Do not allow
the presentation to remain focused solely on
LPI, pro dollars, and component deviations. Here
is exactly how you handle that conversation.
When the rep presents a list of highly recommended
sires, ask them point blank for the projected
inbreeding coefficient on your specific matings.
Ask them exactly how many of those sires sit
above the breed average for health and reproduction.
If they attempt to deflect the question, offer
vague reassurances, or immediately try to steer
your attention back to the glossy LPI number,
they are signaling exactly whose financial interest
that sire list was optimized for. Furthermore,
insist that they help configure your herd in
the Free Compass or PLPI tools. These platforms
are unbiased and allow you to heavily weight
the specific traits, like fertility and health,
that actually dictate your operation's survival.
Synthesizing all of this data provides a very
clear picture of the current genetic landscape.
We are not dismissing the genuine, undeniable
progress these 20 bulls represent in driving
extreme component yields and rapidly proliferating
pole genetics. The sheer production capability
of the modern Holstein is a biological marvel.
However, utilizing LPI as the sole metric for
genetic selection without actively managing the
underlying subindexes and policing inbreeding
accumulation represents an existential financial
risk to a commercial dairy. The current index
paradigm inherently sacrifices health, fertility,
and genetic diversity in the pursuit of extreme
production and type. as we wrap up this deep
dive into the numbers driving the national herd
we want to leave you with a final provocative
thought to consider the next time you are analyzing
a proof sheet if the dairy industry's official
highly engineered economic weighting models are
supposed to perfectly reflect real world farm
profitability Why does utilizing a roster of
sires ranked in the 96th percentile mathematically
guarantee you tens of thousands of dollars in
hidden inbreeding penalties and fertility losses?
It forces us to ask a profound question about
the future of genetic selection. Is our current
concept of lifetime profitability merely measuring
a mathematical, theoretical cow that exists only
on a spreadsheet rather than the living, breathing,
biological animal standing in your barn right
now? Perhaps the next necessary evolution of
genetic indexing shouldn't simply measure the
presence of traits but must fundamentally and
exponentially penalize the accumulation of inbreeding
before it erodes the foundation of the national
herd. It is the defining question that will separate
the resilient profitable dairies of the next
decade from those that slowly bleed out through
invisible genetic drag. This has been another
deep dive from the Bullvine Podcast. For more
straight -talking industry analysis, head to
www .thebullvine .com. Subscribe wherever you
get your podcasts. We are out with new deep dives
every day, and our upcoming topics will keep
cutting through the noise. Always question the
consensus, demand to see the full data set behind
the headline numbers, and keep analyzing the
true drivers of your farm's profitability. We
will see you next time.