Agragene Selected for USDA Grand Challenge and FFAR Grants To Combat New World Screwworm

St. Louis (June 25, 2026) – Agragene announces funding from the USDA New World Screwworm Grand Challenge and from the Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research. The grants were awarded through competitive processes by both USDA and FFAR with the former involving hundreds of submissions. Both grants are designed to facilitate additional research on the company’s novel insect sterility technology.

Agragene uses precision-guided sterile insect technique (pgSIT) to deliver healthy, sterile male flies to mate with wild female screwworm.

Bryan Witherbee, CEO of Agragene, says the technology has demonstrated the ability to deliver significant impact in reducing other invasive pest populations.

“Agragene is excited for the opportunity to develop its pgSIT technology to address New World screwworm. In talking with ranchers, it’s clear they need improved tools. The technology offers a cost-effective, scalable platform to bring healthy sterile males to combat this devastating insect.” Witherbee also notes, “Agragene’s experience in pgSIT development and regulatory work will be a key advantage to bring this technology forward rapidly.”

Dr. Omar S. Akbari, co-founder of Agragene and Tata Chancellor’s Endowed Professor of Cell and Developmental Biology in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of California San Diego, who developed the technology, said:

“These awards provide an important opportunity to accelerate development of next-generation genetic biocontrol technologies for New World screwworm. The resurgence of this devastating pest underscores the urgent need for new tools that can complement existing control strategies. Our precision-guided sterile insect technique, or pgSIT, uses CRISPR-based genetics to produce healthy, sterile males that remain competitive for mates in the wild, with the potential to improve the efficiency and scalability of future screwworm control programs.”

Agragene was selected as a collaborator on projects led by Dr. Max Scott of North Carolina State University and Dr. Molly Duman Scheel of the Indiana University School of Medicine and the University of Notre Dame Eck Institute for Global Health.

 

About Agragene:

Agragene is the leading global company focusing on delivering pgSIT technology to address invasive insect challenges around the world and holds novel intellectual property for this technology and field.

Back to Home

Follow us on Facebook! American Cattlemen | Facebook

Winning the War on Flies

Winning the War on Flies: Building a Summer Health Protocol 

By Jaclyn Krymowski

Flies are a ubiquitous annoyance of any type of livestock business. And while their continual presence can easily be enough motivation to mitigate them, there is another reason to get rid of them – they impact  herd health and increase stress loads. 

Flies cost U.S. producers a whopping $700 million to $1 billion annually according to Ohio State and other land grant university estimates. These losses are in reduced grazing activity, general animal stress and disease transmission within and across herds. Practically, this translates to lowered average daily gain (ADG), less milk production for mother cows and reduced tangible market value. 

Direct action is the only way to get a handle on this problem by way of a holistic control program tied to your herd health and seasonal chores. 

Knowing your enemies 

Multiple fly species make their home on cattle operations across the U.S. While control methods are similar, subtle differences in your plan of attack can make your effort more meaningful. 

Horn Flies 

Horn flies are one of the biggest economic external parasites. These flies live on the animals full time and live off of the host’s blood, feeding as much as 20-40 times each day. They become economically significant at a capacity of around 200 per head and have been shown to reduce ADG. 

Face Flies 

Face flies are best known for being a prime vector for pinkeye. They feed on animals’ eye and nose secretions and carry disease to the next host.  

Stable Flies 

The common stable fly spends time on the host’s legs to feed and is typically responsible for continual stomping. These are particularly troublesome pests with a threshold of only five per leg to reduce performance. Cattle stressed by stable flies will bunch together and be more prone to heat stress. 

Horse Flies, Deer Flies and Mosquitos 

These species generally are of lesser economic significance but all add stress and disease risk. 

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) 

Because flies are a multifaceted issue, there is no single tool that works. This means that the only way to handle them is with an integrated pest management (IPM) strategy. 

Extension programs consistently emphasize combining multiple approaches.  

Sanitation and manure management arguably provide the highest return on investment and are the most overlooked aspects of a fly control program. 

Key practices include removing manure and wet organic matter as soon as possible. This includes managing hay waste and other feeding refusal, handling manure storage and containment properly and cleaning winter feeding sites before spring mating. This helps break the flies’ lifecycles (egg, larva, pupa and adult) before they have time to establish themselves as the weather grows warmer and they take advantage of excess moisture.

Larval control focuses on interrupting the fly lifecycle before adult populations explode. Common tools include insect growth regulators (IGRs) delivered through mineral or feed, along with larvicides applied directly to breeding areas like manure storage sheds. Predatory wasps would also target this segment of cycle. IGRs and similar products only work with consistency; notably feed additives also require that all animals are consuming them at adequate levels.  

A good management tip is timing as these need to be in place before the fly season begins, ideally at least two weeks before. Note that this is especially important in regions on the lookout for  New World Screwworm where this type of early stage prevention, along with proper wound care, is the best combatant. 

Adult controls should also be part of this program. You should expect to do this to some extent with any IPM, but if you were proactive earlier in the year you can reduce the load. 

On-animal treatments include ear tags (typically lasting 30–60 days), pour-ons, back rubbers and dust bags. There are also spray systems that can be mounted to tractors and ATVs to treat animals. These tools are especially effective for horn flies and external parasites that spend most of their time on the animal.  

Walk through traps and premise sprays can be particularly useful for stable flies and other species that spend more time off the animal. Strategic placement is just as important as the product itself. Tools should be located in essentially trafficked areas such as water sources, mineral feeders or gate openings. 

Similar to internal parasites and deworming medication, over reliance on a single product or class of insecticide quickly leads to resistance and reduced effectiveness. 

Key principles include rotating insecticide classes annually, avoiding underdosing and removing old insecticidal ear tags at the end of the season. 

Fly control is a season-long system tied directly to herd health and performance. With a good IPM in place, you can expect to cut back significantly on fly related losses and improved animal health. But remember that this fight is an ongoing one — the operations that see the best results are those that stay consistent, start early and layer multiple strategies together. 

 

Back to Home

Follow us on Facebook! American Cattlemen | Facebook

Making Creep Feeding Work for Your Operation

Making Creep Feeding Work for Your Operation

By Jaclyn Krymowski

Feed is one of the largest expenses in any livestock operation. Because of that, every feeding decision matters. Producers want to use feed as efficiently as possible while maximizing returns.

One area where those decisions have a major impact is calf development before weaning. Creep feeding often raises an important question: Is the extra feed worth the extra weight?

The answer isn’t always straightforward. Heavier calves at weaning usually mean more pounds to sell. However, those additional pounds also require more feed and higher production costs. Whether creep feeding is profitable depends on the individual operation. Each producer must weigh several economic and management factors before deciding if it fits their program.

According to the Situation

When managed correctly, creep feeding is an effective way to increase weaning weights. However, higher feeder cattle prices and lower feed costs do not automatically mean producers should creep feed every calf.

A successful program requires careful evaluation of both economics and animal performance. Neither is easy to predict.

Feed conversion, for example, varies considerably among creep-fed calves. In some situations, calves may convert feed at an excellent rate of 5 pounds of feed for every pound of gain. In other cases, conversion may decline to 15 pounds of feed per pound of gain.

Several factors influence feed efficiency. Cow milk production is one of the biggest. Calves nursing heavy-milking cows often convert creep feed poorly because much of their nutrition already comes from milk. Genetics, forage quality and the type of creep ration also affect feed conversion.

Environmental conditions also play an important role. During drought, for example, creep feed often produces better gains than relying on forage alone.

Even if producers understand feed conversion and the value of additional weight gain, outside factors can still affect profitability.

One example is grazing endophyte-infected fescue. Under those conditions, creep feeding almost always provides a benefit. Research from the University of Illinois found that energy-based creep rations produced better results than protein supplements in these situations.

The same research also evaluated different feeding periods. Calves that received creep feed for about 56 days before weaning converted feed more efficiently than calves fed for only 28 days or as long as 84 days. Those calves gained approximately 0.75 pounds more per day than calves that received no creep feed.

Not every calf should receive creep feed, however.

Producers planning to retain replacement heifers should avoid creep feeding those animals. High nutrient intake early in life can interfere with mammary gland development. It may also create other developmental problems that reduce future productivity as brood cows.

Back to Home

Follow us on Facebook! American Cattlemen | Facebook