The objectives of this retrospective study were to (1) investigate the effects of heat stress (HS) climatic conditions and breed on milk and component yield for Holstein and Jersey cows on the same farm and (2) determine the effects of breed on udder health as measured by somatic cell score during HS climatic conditions. Data were collected from Dairy Herd Improvement Association records of 142 Jersey and 586 Holstein cows from the Bearden Dairy Research Center at Mississippi State University (Mississippi State). Heat stress climatic conditions were determined using a temperature-humidity index (THI) to combine dry bulb temperature and relative humidity into one measure. Two analyses were conducted to determine the effects of HS. Heat stress was defined as THI ≥ 72, and reported as HS+ for the first analysis and HS for the second analysis. The first analysis compared breeds during HS+ and non-heat-stress (HS-) conditions. Holstein milk yield decreased during HS+, whereas Jersey milk yield increased. Milk fat percentage for Holstein and Jersey cows declined during HS+. Holstein fat-corrected milk yield decreased during HS+, whereas Jersey fat-corrected milk yield during HS+ did not differ from that during HS-. During HS+, somatic cell score increased in milk from Holstein and Jersey cows compared with HS-. In the second analysis, HS was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe. The corresponding THI values were THI ≥ 72 but <79, THI ≥ 79 but <90, and THI ≥ 90. Holstein milk yield declined during moderate and severe HS, whereas Jersey milk yield declined during severe HS. Holstein milk fat percentage was less during moderate and severe HS compared with milk fat percentage during mild HS. Jersey milk fat percentage did not differ with regard to HS category. Jersey cows appeared to be more heat tolerant than Holstein cows; however, Holstein cows still produced larger volumes of milk.

No abstract

Because water and gas production often causes reservoir, wellbore, and surface facility problems, controlling water and gas production is a primary concern for hydrocarbon producers. Problems associated with water and gas production have triggered many companies, research institutions, and universities to study water- and gas-production problems and develop chemicals and mechanical products that can control these problems. Because of the varieties of studies and products there are differences in terminology regarding these chemicals and areas of application. As a consequence, there are differences in expectations of these products, too. In this paper, chemical systems are categorized as nonsealing and sealing. A standard testing procedure is suggested to help evaluate the performance of the different systems. Standardized testing should help the industry compare the performance of different systems under specific conditions. This paper will consider treatment techniques and operations to emphasize the importance of detailed job design and operations planning. The paper ends with a summary of the economics involved in water and gas production. The method presented for determining a treatment's value can be used to evaluate the feasibility of water- or gas-control treatments. Introduction Many problems that are associated with the production of unwanted water and gas can be solved by a mechanical and/or a chemical solution. When more than one method is available to solve a problem, a particular method's reliability, pricing, and convenience, as well as the experience of the user can determine the method of choice. Choosing the most suitable solution requires determining the cause of the water- or gas-production problem. Sometimes the production problems are present on reservoir scale. In other cases, the problem is caused by wellbore conditions, or the capacity of the surface-production installation may demand a water- or gas-control treatment. When the problem has been clearly identified, a suitable solution can usually be chosen. Understanding which system is suitable for an application can be confusing because of the many systems and chemicals available. Differences in terminology and interpretations of the performance of certain chemicals can add to the confusion. Laboratory testing that compares the performance of systems can help identify the most suitable chemical solution for a particular situation. A single experimental program should be used for directly comparing systems. However, McPhee1 has shown that the results of institutions with identical testing programs can vary even in relatively simple experiments. Therefore, in this paper, a standard evaluation method for water- and gas-control chemicals is proposed. Although a chemical may perform well under reservoir conditions in a laboratory test, a successful performance during an operation cannot be guaranteed. A primary reason for the relatively low rate of success in water and gas shutoff operations is the use of an incorrect candidate-selection process. Several authors have suggested procedures and guidelines for water- and gas-control interventions.2–5 In this paper, guidelines will be presented that can help improve the success rate of water- and gas-control operations. Justifying the expense of water- and gas-control operations requires knowledge of the financial goals of the treatment. The costs of the operation should be in balance with the benefits and risks. Because financial aspects are the drivers behind water and gas control, this paper will present guidelines for financial consideration.

No abstract

No abstract

Gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN) are an important cause of morbidity and production losses in cattle. Clinical infection with GIN can cause diarrhea and hypoalbuminemia, but subclinical infections are more prevalent, harder to recognize, and a greater threat to productivity. Emphasis in the dairy industry has been placed on management strategies to mitigate disease and productive losses caused by GIN infections in grazing heifers and adult cattle, but hutch calves have largely been left out of this discussion. Milk-fed dairy calves housed in hutches are presumed not to acquire GIN infection because transmission of GIN is thought to require exposure to a pasture environment and subsequent ingestion of contaminated forage. However, a recent assessment of fecal egg counts (FEC) in hutch calves for another research project revealed calves raised in hutches with unexpectedly high FEC. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence and magnitude of GIN in hutch calves on two calf ranches and to evaluate factors associated with the probability for calves to be parasitized.

No abstract

Most knowledge management implementations include communities of practice or networks which allow people to connect to other people, share ideas and discuss issues. Communities have been shown to be informative, solve business problems, and create innovative solutions. They are usually focused around disciplines, projects, products, services, or general issues. Unfortunately, companies find the majority of their communities have little to no activity, do not show sustainable results or demonstrate any measure of business impact. Only a very few knowledge management (KM) implementations produce true business value, and the oil industry is no exception. In fact, the April 2004 issue of CIO magazine 1 noted that "85% of all KM initiatives fail". We can only assume that the communities of practice in these implementations are not creating value. This paper will detail the evolutionary changes in communities of practice within a petroleum services company. We will look at changes in community audience, facilitation, and leadership along with the actions taken to ensure that the KM communities create value. Background In 1998, our corporate vision was to be the real-time knowledge company servicing the upstream petroleum industry. In 2001, our CEO launched the KM process focused toward business objectives to improve productivity, increase efficiency, reduce operation costs, and promote best practices. Our definition of knowledge management is the systematic approach to getting the right information to the right people at the right time. The systematic approach includes:Search and find the information you needIf you can't find the information, ask for help from someone who has it or who can help you find itCapture what you learn, so you or others can access it as neededShare your knowledge with others The KM System is used by both experienced and inexperienced community members. (See Fig. 1) Because most of our KM communities are open to everyone, users may have diverse backgrounds in terms of experience, geography, and functional roles. They can search for information within the community knowledge repository. The knowledge repository is a virtual repository in that the community links to the information it needs, including formally managed documents, unmanaged documents, websites, discussions, training materials, quality system data, and other content. Search strategies may include text searches, category searches, hierarchical navigation, and other means of finding information.