Encapsulated fumaric acid as a means of decreasing ruminal methane emissions

Wallace, R. J.; Wood, T.A.; Rowe, Annette R.; Price, Jill A.; Yañez, David; Williams, S. P.; Newbold, C. J.

doi:10.1016/j.ics.2006.02.018

Cited by 38 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, no changes were reported in beef heifers (Beauchemin and McGinn, 2006), whereas up to ,16% decreases were reported in beef cattle (Foley et al, 2009), although in this last study feed intake for organic acid-supplemented animals was also reduced. An exceptional decrease in CH 4 production, up to 75%, has been shown with 10% encapsulated fumarate in the diet of lambs without negative effect on animal growth (Wallace et al, 2006). In contrast, encapsulated fumarate had no significant effect in another trial in dairy cows (McCourt et al, 2008).…”

Section: Mitigation Through Additivesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale

Martin

Morgavi

Doreau

2010

Animal

748

657

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decreasing enteric methane (CH 4 ) emissions from ruminants without altering animal production is desirable both as a strategy to reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and as a means of improving feed conversion efficiency. The aim of this paper is to provide an update on a selection of proved and potential strategies to mitigate enteric CH 4 production by ruminants. Various biotechnologies are currently being explored with mixed results. Approaches to control methanogens through vaccination or the use of bacteriocins highlight the difficulty to modulate the rumen microbial ecosystem durably. The use of probiotics, i.e. acetogens and live yeasts, remains a potentially interesting approach, but results have been either unsatisfactory, not conclusive, or have yet to be confirmed in vivo. Elimination of the rumen protozoa to mitigate methanogenesis is promising, but this option should be carefully evaluated in terms of livestock performances. In addition, on-farm defaunation techniques are not available up to now. Several feed additives such as ionophores, organic acids and plant extracts have also been assayed. The potential use of plant extracts to reduce CH 4 is receiving a renewed interest as they are seen as a natural alternative to chemical additives and are well perceived by consumers. The response to tannin-and saponincontaining plant extracts is highly variable and more research is needed to assess the effectiveness and eventual presence of undesirable residues in animal products. Nutritional strategies to mitigate CH 4 emissions from ruminants are, without doubt, the most developed and ready to be applied in the field. Approaches presented in this paper involve interventions on the nature and amount of energy-based concentrates and forages, which constitute the main component of diets as well as the use of lipid supplements. The possible selection of animals based on low CH 4 production and more likely on their high efficiency of digestive processes is also addressed. Whatever the approach proposed, however, before practical solutions are applied in the field, the sustainability of CH 4 suppressing strategies is an important issue that has to be considered. The evaluation of different strategies, in terms of total GHG emissions for a given production system, is discussed.Keywords: methane, greenhouse gases, ruminant, mitigation strategies Implications Methane (CH 4 ) mitigation in ruminants is possible through various strategies. Today, the feeding management approach is the most developed. Other strategies (biotechnologies, additives) are promising but the diversity and plasticity of functions of the rumen bacterial and methanogenic communities may be a limiting factor for their successful application. A possible selection of animals on CH 4 production and more likely on digestive processes is evocated. In any case, before practical solutions are proposed for field application more research in vivo is needed. The sustainability of CH 4 -suppressing strategies is also an important issue and they mi...

show abstract

Section: Mitigation Through Additivesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale

Martin

Morgavi

Doreau

2010

Animal

748

657

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the results are not consistent depending upon the dose levels and diets (Foley et al 2009). For example, CH 4 emissions were not affected by addition of fumarate (10 g kg −1 ) in the diet of beef cattle (Beauchemin and McGinn 2006), while CH 4 outputs from sheep were decreased by feeding of higher level of fumarate (10% of diet) to the extent of 40% to 75% per kg of DM intake, and there was an improvement of animal performance (Wallace et al 2006). The inconsistency of these acids on CH 4 production might be due to the conversion of these acids to acetate instead of propionate that stoichiometrically may increase CH 4 production in the rumen (Ungerfeld et al 2007).…”

Section: Propionate Enhancersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enteric methane mitigation technologies for ruminant livestock: a synthesis of current research and future directions

Patra

2011

Environ Monit Assess

199

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enteric methane (CH(4)) emission in ruminants, which is produced via fermentation of feeds in the rumen and lower digestive tract by methanogenic archaea, represents a loss of 2% to 12% of gross energy of feeds and contributes to global greenhouse effects. Globally, about 80 million tonnes of CH(4) is produced annually from enteric fermentation mainly from ruminants. Therefore, CH(4) mitigation strategies in ruminants have focused to obtain economic as well as environmental benefits. Some mitigation options such as chemical inhibitors, defaunation, and ionophores inhibit methanogenesis directly or indirectly in the rumen, but they have not confirmed consistent effects for practical use. A variety of nutritional amendments such as increasing the amount of grains, inclusion of some leguminous forages containing condensed tannins and ionophore compounds in diets, supplementation of low-quality roughages with protein and readily fermentable carbohydrates, and addition of fats show promise for CH(4) mitigation. These nutritional amendments also increase the efficiency of feed utilization and, therefore, are most likely to be adopted by farmers. Several new potential technologies such as use of plant secondary metabolites, probiotics and propionate enhancers, stimulation of acetogens, immunization, CH(4) oxidation by methylotrophs, and genetic selection of low CH(4)-producing animals have emerged to decrease CH(4) production, but these require extensive research before they can be recommended to livestock producers. The use of bacteriocins, bacteriophages, and development of recombinant vaccines targeting archaeal-specific genes and cell surface proteins may be areas worthy of investigation for CH(4) mitigation as well. A combination of different CH(4) mitigation strategies should be adopted in farm levels to substantially decrease methane emission from ruminants. Evidently, comprehensive research is needed to explore proven and reliable CH(4) mitigation technologies that would be practically feasible and economically viable while improving ruminant production.

show abstract

“…prevented by using an encapsulated form of fumaric acid made of a mixture of fumaric acid (85%) and partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (15%) (Wallace et al, 2006). This allowed a decrease in methane production of up to 75%, accompanied by an increase in feed conversion efficiency, in lambs supplemented with fumaric acid given at a dose of 10% of the diet.…”

Section: Dicarboxylic Acidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of ‘natural’ products as alternatives to antibiotic feed additives in ruminant production

Jouany

Morgavi

2007

Animal

250

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The banning in 2006 of the use of antibiotics as animal growth promoters in the European Union has increased demand from producers for alternative feed additives that can be used to improve animal production. This review gives an overview of the most common non-antibiotic feed additives already being used or that could potentially be used in ruminant nutrition. Probiotics, dicarboxylic acids, enzymes and plant-derived products including saponins, tannins and essential oils are presented. The known modes of action and effects of these additives on feed digestion and more especially on rumen fermentations are described. Their utility and limitations in field conditions for modern ruminant production systems and their compliance with the current legislation are also discussed.

show abstract

Encapsulated fumaric acid as a means of decreasing ruminal methane emissions

Cited by 38 publications

References 5 publications

Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale

Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale

Enteric methane mitigation technologies for ruminant livestock: a synthesis of current research and future directions

Use of ‘natural’ products as alternatives to antibiotic feed additives in ruminant production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About