An in vivo study was conducted to compare the enteric methane emissions and diversity of ruminal methanogens in cattle and buffaloes kept in the same environment and fed on the same diet. Six cattle and six buffaloes were fed on a similar diet comprising Napier (Pennisetum purpureum) green grass and concentrate in 70:30. After 90 days of feeding, the daily enteric methane emissions were quantified by using the SF6 technique and ruminal fluid samples from animals were collected for the diversity analysis. The daily enteric methane emissions were significantly greater in cattle as compared to buffaloes; however, methane yields were not different between the two species. Methanogens were ranked at different taxonomic levels against the Rumen and Intestinal Methanogen-Database. The archaeal communities in both host species were dominated by the phylum Euryarchaeota; however, Crenarchaeota represented <1% of the total archaea. Methanogens affiliated with Methanobacteriales were most prominent and their proportion did not differ between the two hosts. Methanomicrobiales and Methanomassillicoccales constituted the second largest group of methanogens in cattle and buffaloes, respectively. Methanocellales (Methanocella arvoryza) were exclusively detected in the buffaloes. At the species level, Methanobrevibacter gottschalkii had the highest abundance (55–57%) in both the host species. The relative abundance of Methanobrevibacter wolinii between the two hosts differed significantly. Methanosarcinales, the acetoclastic methanogens were significantly greater in cattle than the buffaloes. It is concluded that the ruminal methane yield in cattle and buffaloes fed on the same diet did not differ. With the diet used in this study, there was a limited influence (<3.5%) of the host on the structure of the ruminal archaea community at the species level. Therefore, the methane mitigation strategies developed in either of the hosts should be effective in the other. Further studies are warranted to reveal the conjunctive effect of diet and geographical locations with the host on ruminal archaea community composition.

A study was conducted to investigate the impact of an anti-methanogenic product supplementation on enteric methane emissions, whole rumen metagenome and ruminal fermentation in sheep. Twelve adult male sheep were randomly divided into two groups of six animals each. Animals were fed ad libitum on a total mixed ration either without (CON) or with an anti-methanogenic supplement (Harit Dhara-HD). The anti-methanogenic supplement contained 22.1% tannic acid in a 3: 1 ratio of condensed and hydrolysable tannins. The supplementation of product revealed a significant reduction in daily enteric methane emission (21.9 vs. 17.2 g/d) and methane yield (23.2 vs. 18.2) without affecting the nutrient intake and digestibility. However, the propionate concentration in the HD treatment group was significantly higher than in the CON group. On the contrary, the ammonia nitrogen concentration was lower. The anti-methanogenic supplement significantly decreased the ruminal protozoa in the HD treatment group. Whole rumen metagenome analysis revealed that the core bacterial (Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes) and archaeal communities (Methanobrevibacter and Methanosarcina) were comparable between the CON and HD treatment groups. However, the supplementation of anti-methanogenic product led to a considerable reduction in the abundance of Proteobacteria, whereas the abundance of Lentisphaerae was greater. The supplementation significantly decreased the abundance of Methanocaldococcus, Methanococcoides, Methanocella, and Methanoregula methanogens. A total of 36 KO related to methanogenesis were identified in this study. The activities of formate dehydrogenase (EC 1.8.98.6) and tetrahydromethanopterin S-methyltransferase (EC 2.1.1.86) were significantly lowered by the anti-methanogenic product supplementation in sheep. In conclusion, the anti-methanogenic supplement has the potential to decrease enteric methane emission (~22%) at the recommended level (5% of DM) of supplementation. The contribution of minor methanogens vulnerable to supplementation to rumen methanogenesis is not known; hence, the culturing of these archaea should be taken on priority for determining the impact on overall rumen methanogenesis.

No abstract

No abstract