Cooperative State Research, Education, And Extension Service Research Articles

IPM: Where to Next?

American Entomologist • Summer 2010 In this paper, we present a brief overview of IPM’s history, its present status, and current and future trends we see developing, along with our suggestions for actions that we believe will help IPM implementation grow and prosper as a unifying concept. Our careers as colleagues and collaborators have spanned over 30 years, beginning in 1978 in the Department of Entomology at North Dakota State University (Kopp with an extension appointment and Meyer with a research/teaching appointment). For the past 12 years, we have had program leadership roles in the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). In Washington, working with colleagues and stakeholders, we have had the opportunity to conceptualize, prioritize, direct, manage and implement IPMrelated programs at the national level. At least in some small ways, we have shaped and focused directions for federally funded USDA IPM programs. We have served in leadership roles for the following USDA programs: National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (NAPIAP), Regional IPM Centers, Pest Management Alternatives Program (PMAP), Crops at Risk (CAR), Risk Avoidance and Management Program (RAMP), Methyl Bromide Transitions (MBT), Minor Crops Pest Management (IR-4) Program, National Plant Diagnostic Network (NPDN), and Critical Issues: Emerging and New Plant and Animal Pests and Diseases Program. The ideas presented here have evolved over the course of our shared state and federal careers: these perceptions, ideas and suggestions represent our own views and are not those of the USDA, CSREES or that of the federal government. CSREES has now been reorganized, consistent with requirements of the 2008 Farm Bill legislation, and became the National Institute of Dennis D. Kopp and H.J. (Rick) Meyer

The first five years of the Conservation Effects Assessment Project

T he Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) was initiated by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) in response to a general call for better accountability of how society would benefit from the 2002 farm bill's substantial increase in conservation program funding (Mausbach and Dedrick 2004). The original goals of CEAP were to establish the scientific understanding of the effects of conservation practices at the watershed scale and to estimate conservation impacts and benefits for reporting at the national and regional levels. Other federal agencies and nongovernmental organizations with conservation and natural resource interests are currently partners in various CEAP activities, often through jointly funded research projects. CEAP activities are organized into three interconnected efforts: 1. Bibliographies, literature reviews, and a scientific workshop to establish what is known about the environmental effects of conservation practices at field and watershed scales, and what kinds of research and data collection are needed to assess conservation practice benefits. 2. Watershed assessment studies to provide in-depth quantification of water quality and soil quality impacts of conservation practices at the local level and to provide insight on what practices are needed…

US Governmental Interagency Programs, Opportunities, and Collaboration

Improving the quality, value, and safety of national food supplies is the common mission of several Federal agencies. Under different authorities, these agencies conduct basic and applied research, develop curriculum at higher educational institutions, and disseminate new scientific knowledge about food processing, formulation, and preservation to a broad range of stakeholders. Emerging food processing technologies, including various thermal and nonthermal processes, as well as chemical processes, have received increased attention and investment in recent years. Some agencies dealing with Emerging Technologies include the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS), and all of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The U.S. Army Natick Research Center of Department of Defense (DOD), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of Department of Human Health Service (DHHS) also are involved in this research area. These agencies have their vision, mission, strategic goals, and current programs and activities related to emerging food processing technologies. The synergy of effective collaboration and cooperation among all stakeholders is the key to generating an impact greater than the simple sum of all.

199 EFFECT OF HEPARIN CONCENTRATION ON BOVINE PREIMPLANTATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN VITRO USING SEX-SORTED SPERM

The objective of this study was to examine the effect of heparin on bovine IVF and to improve the efficiency of IVF production by using sex-sorted sperm. The fertility performance of sex-sorted and unsorted semen from 4 bulls was compared to determine the optimal heparin concentration during preimplantational embryo development. A total of 7615 matured bovine oocytes were randomly allocated among different heparin concentrations (0, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 μg mL–1) in Brackett-Oliphant medium and coincubated with either sex-sorted or unsorted sperm for 6 h. Presumptive zygotes were cultured in CR1aa+ 6 mg mL–1 of BSA in 5% O2 , 5% CO2 and 90% N2 at 39°C until Day 8 (Day 0, culture post-IVF). Cleavage rates at Day 2 and embryo development to blastocyst (BL) at Day 8 were recorded. Data (4 replicates) were analyzed by a general linear model (SPSS 11.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). The optimal heparin concentration for each treatment was determined as the lowest value from those groups that resulted in the highest BL rates. The results (Table 1) demonstrated that a differential requirement of heparin concentration was important for the highest preimplantational BL development between sexed sperm and unsorted control within each bull. By optimizing heparin concentration, in 3 out of 4 (75%) bulls, the in vitro BL development with sex-sorted sperm could be increased to a level that was comparable to the highest BL rate from unsorted sperm (bulls A, B, and C, P > 0.05). A higher heparin concentration was required for optimal BL development in bulls A and C; however, a lower concentration was desirable for bulls B and D, indicating that a partial capacitation to the sperm may have taken place in bulls B and D during the sorting process, as reported by Lu and Seidel (2004 Theriogenology 62, 819–830). The fertility of sorted sperm from bull D (1 out of 4, 25%) was adversely affected, even after heparin optimization for BL development (P < 0.05). This result suggests that sperm sorting could affect the IVF fertility of sorted sperm in a bull-specific manner, but it was not significant for all bulls. Table 1. Blastocyst (BL) development in bovine IVF after heparin optimization using sorted and unsorted sperm This project was supported by the SBIR program under a USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) grant to F. Du (USDA #2006-03069).

New Roles for Rangelands and Grasslands: The Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) is retooling its efforts to build awareness for rangeland and grassland attributes

The Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) is retooling its efforts to build awareness for rangeland and grassland attributes. DOI:10.2458/azu_rangelands_v29i3_gordon

Assessing Individual Food Expenditures for Epidemiologic Studies: Recalls, Records, and Receipts

Epidemiologic studies of the relationship between diet composition, cost, and health require assessment of individual food expenditures. While dietary exposure variables are expressed per person per day, food expenditure data are typically collected per household per month. Few studies have reported true individual food costs or the methodology needed to do so. This study used food records and receipts to determine individual food expenditures among 160 adults (106 women, 54 men). Participants attended a 2-hour training, kept food receipts for 4 weeks, completed a 4-day food record, and debriefed with the dietitian afterward. Each food eaten was associated with a receipt-based cost where available. Rules were set to deal with restaurant meals, recipes, missing prices, and “free” foods. Daily dietary intakes were analyzed, then linked to daily food expenses and analyzed for the association between dietary energy density and cost. Preliminary analyses indicate 92% (range 77–100%) of the foods eaten were associated with a receipt-based cost using the 4-week receipt collection method. This study links economic considerations in individual food choice behavior, such as food prices and diet quality, with classic methods of dietary intake assessment. Supported by USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) grant 2004-35215-14441 and NIDCR fellowship T32 DE07132.

New Roles for Rangelands and Grasslands

The Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) is retooling its efforts to build awareness for rangeland and grassland attributes.

Identifying the Future Needs for Long-Term USDA Efforts in Agricultural Animal Genomics

Agricultural animal research has been immensely successful over the past century in developing technology and methodologies that have dramatically enhanced production efficiency of the beef, dairy, swine, poultry, sheep, and aquaculture industries. In the past two decades, molecular biology has changed the face of agricultural animal research, primarily in the arena of genomics and the relatively new offshoot areas of functional genomics, proteomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics and metagenomics. Publication of genetic and physical genome maps in the past 15 years has given rise to the possibility of being able finally to understand the molecular nature of the genetic component of phenotypic variation. While quantitative geneticists have been remarkably successful in improving production traits, genomic technology holds potential for being able to lead to more accurate and rapid animal improvement, especially for phenotypic traits that are difficult to measure.Recently, the agricultural research community has been able to capitalize on the infrastructure built by the human genome project by sequencing two of the major livestock genomes (Gallus domesticus and Bos Taurus). The 2005 calendar year is truly unprecedented in the history of agricultural animal research since draft genome sequences were completed for chickens and cattle. In addition, sequencing the swine and equine genome was initiated in early 2006. We now have in place a powerful toolbox for understanding the genetic variation underlying economically important and complex phenotypes. Over the past few years, new challenges have emerged for animal agriculture. Enhancements in production efficiency have not come without some negative side effects on animal well-being and longevity in production environments, including losses in reproductive efficiency, increased stress susceptibility, increased animal waste issues, and increased susceptibility to animal metabolic and infectious diseases. When considered in concert with societal concerns in the areas of natural resource conservation and protection, animal welfare, and food safety, it is clear that publicly supported agricultural research must be focused on enhancing the functionality and well-being of livestock and poultry in environmentally neutral production systems in the future. Realizing the great potential for animal genomics to address these and other issues, a workshop was convened by the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in Washington, DC in September of 2004. The workshop was entitled "Charting the Road Map for Long Term USDA Efforts in Agricultural Animal Genomics". This paper summarizes the proceedings of the workshop and the resulting recommendations. The need for a cohesive, comprehensive long-term plan for all of USDA's research efforts in animal genomics was evident at the workshop, requiring further integration of the efforts of the USDA's Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and the USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) to achieve the greatest return on investment.

Washington Update

Paul Patterson is the recipient of the 2005 Poultry Extension Special Recognition Award for his exceptional contributions to regional and national extension programs over many years. Current responsibilities include the recently completed National Swine Alternative Housing project; liaison to several multistate research committees; review of grant proposals, plans of work and accomplishment reports and Hatch projects; coordination of biobased plant nutrient related workshops; and evaluation of CRIS reports. The National Extension Workshop has a long track record of accomplishment, which has been possible only through the dedicated efforts of volunteers. The Future Trends in Animal Agriculture 2005 symposium was “Certification and Education Programs: Current Status of Farm Animal Welfare.” The Triennial Poultry Extension Workshop will become a biennial event in 2007. The National Poultry Waste Management Symposium was led by Mike Hulet in 2004. Susan Watkins is the coordinator for 2006; please contact Susan to volunteer.New procedures for USDA grants and deadlines can be found on the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) Web site. The CSREES/Plant and Animal Systems (PAS) review of their portfolio on animal health and welfare resulted in an outstanding evaluation (95/100). Increasing demands for accountability require increased documentation by all persons in our system. Michigan State and Purdue University are providing leadership in several animal welfare educational areas, including assessment and distance education programs. The Texture Technologies Corporation Support Personnel Award recipient is JoAnna Tharrington Foegeding, North Carolina State University. This award will be sponsored by Tyson Foods, Inc. in 2006. We are achieving impressive results through cooperation and networking, which are of increasing importance. Continued teamwork and increased participation in multistate research committees is essential.

Funding Priorities in Animal Reproduction at the United States Department of Agriculture’s Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service1

The National Research Initiative (NRI) Competitive Grants Program is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's major competitive grants program and is administered by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). Since its inception in 1991, the NRI has funded competitive grants in the discipline of animal reproduction. Previously, this program provided funding for a broad range of projects encompassing almost every subdiscipline in reproductive biology of farm animals, including aquatic species important to the aquaculture industry. During fiscal year 2004, the NRI Animal Reproduction Program narrowed the focus of funding priorities to the topics of infertility, basic mechanisms regulating fertility, cryopreservation of gametes, reducing the postpartum interval to conception, and sterilization methods or development of monosex populations. In response to a directive to further narrow the focus of funding priorities for fiscal year 2005 and beyond, CSREES conducted a Stakeholder Workshop on Funding Priorities in Animal Reproduction at the 37th Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of Reproduction in Vancouver, Canada. More than 75 stakeholder scientists from a cross section of federal, public, and private institutions from across the United States participated in the workshop and provided recommendations to CSREES for future NRI-funding priorities in Animal Reproduction. The recommendations provided by stakeholders included continuing efforts to focus funding priorities into fewer high-impact areas relevant to animal agriculture and aquaculture. Recommendations also included movement back toward subdisciplines of animal reproduction that cut across all applicable species. The three funding priorities that consistently emerged as recommendations from the workshop participants were 1) gonadal function and production of gametes, 2) pituitary-hypothalamic function, and 3) embryo and conceptus development, including interaction between the conceptus and uterus. These funding priorities were considered when preparing the fiscal year 2006 NRI Request for Applications.

Washington Update

This workshop represented the second national collaborative extension effort associated with joint annual meetings of the professional societies. Multistate research committees are important cooperative federal programs. NCR-131 (Animal Behavior) and WCC-204 (Animal Bio-ethics) are both moving toward recognition as full multistate research committees and welcome poultry science members. The organic market is of increasing importance, and an organic animal production and processing research committee is being created to address these issues. Effective immediately, the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) review of Hatch Act proposals will affirm that the goals and objectives of the proposal are consistent with the Hatch Act and fall within the strategic objectives of USDA and CSREES.The CSREES has chosen a review of our portfolio of programs as a cogent way to justify our budget requests. An outcome of the review process regarding extension programs is the need to find better ways to quantify qualitative results from extension efforts (e.g., reporting that biosecurity programs prevented disease spread vs. reporting that biosecurity programs saved the turkey industry a certain numbr of dollars).Concepts developed by the Animal Behavior and Welfare Group, led by Michigan State University, for collegiate animal welfare assessment competitions are to be transferred to 4-H and Future Farmers of America (FFA) as upper-level student competition. The Poultry Science Resource List was revised in 2004 [1]. Deborah Posey (USDA/ARS, Athens, GA) was the 2004 recipient of the Support Personnel Award.

USDA Stakeholder Workshop on Animal Bioinformatics: Summary and Recommendations

An electronic workshop was conducted on 4 November–13 December 2002 to discuss current issues and needs in animal bioinformatics. The electronic (e-mail listserver) format was chosen to provide a relatively speedy process that is broad in scope, cost-efficient and easily accessible to all participants. Approximately 40 panelists with diverse species and discipline expertise communicated through the panel e-mail listserver. The panel included scientists from academia, industry and government, in the USA, Australia and the UK. A second ‘stakeholder’ e-mail listserver was used to obtain input from a broad audience with general interests in animal genomics. The objectives of the electronic workshop were: (a) to define priorities for animal genome database development; and (b) to recommend ways in which the USDA could provide leadership in the area of animal genome database development. E-mail messages from panelists and stakeholders are archived at http://genome.cvm.umn.edu/bioinfo/. Priorities defined for animal genome database development included: (a) data repository; (b) tools for genome analysis; (c) annotation; (d) practical application of genomic data; and (e) a biological framework for DNA sequence. A stable source of funding, such as the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS), was recommended to support maintenance of data repositories and data curation. Continued support for competitive grants programs within the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) was recommended for tool development and hypothesis-driven research projects in genome analysis. Additional stakeholder input will be required to continuously refine priorities and maximize the use of limited resources for animal bioinformatics within the USDA.

Regionalism in the Western Hemisphere and Its Impact on U.S. Agricultural Exports: A Gravity‐Model Analysis

American Journal of Agricultural EconomicsVolume 84, Issue 3 p. 791-797 Proceeding Regionalism in the Western Hemisphere and Its Impact on U.S. Agricultural Exports: A Gravity-Model Analysis Steven S. Zahniser, Steven S. Zahniser agricultural economist U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service This paper was presented at the ASSA winter meetings (Atlanta, GA, January 2002). Papers in these sessions are not subjected to the journal's standard refereeing processSearch for more papers by this authorDaniel Pick, Daniel Pick branch chief of Specialty Crops U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of a competitive grant from the National Research Initiative of USDA' Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), and thank Mary Burfisher, John Dunmore, and Zhi Wang for their helpful comments. Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not of USDA, ERS, or CSREES.Search for more papers by this authorGreg Pompelli, Greg Pompelli branch chief of Global Agricultural Markets U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research ServiceSearch for more papers by this authorMark J. Gehlhar, Mark J. Gehlhar agricultural economist U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research ServiceSearch for more papers by this author Steven S. Zahniser, Steven S. Zahniser agricultural economist U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service This paper was presented at the ASSA winter meetings (Atlanta, GA, January 2002). Papers in these sessions are not subjected to the journal's standard refereeing processSearch for more papers by this authorDaniel Pick, Daniel Pick branch chief of Specialty Crops U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of a competitive grant from the National Research Initiative of USDA' Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), and thank Mary Burfisher, John Dunmore, and Zhi Wang for their helpful comments. Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not of USDA, ERS, or CSREES.Search for more papers by this authorGreg Pompelli, Greg Pompelli branch chief of Global Agricultural Markets U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research ServiceSearch for more papers by this authorMark J. Gehlhar, Mark J. Gehlhar agricultural economist U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research ServiceSearch for more papers by this author First published: 01 August 2002 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8276.00338Citations: 21 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume84, Issue3August 2002Pages 791-797 RelatedInformation

Expanding Nutrition Opportunities from Hospital into the Community

Employment opportunities in the hospital setting continue to decline because of downsizing and the changing health care arena.1 Yet, opportunities in the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (or Cooperative Extension System, as it is often called), particularly Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS), are growing. Although funding for the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) varies from state to state and area to area, national funding has been fairly stable over the past several years. In addition, each year more CSREES programs secure grant funds to accomplish their mission. This support offers broadened opportunities for new employees, creating an abundance of opportunity for nutrition professionals to move out of the hospital treatment setting and into the community, where preventive intervention can be implemented and achieved.