Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Dairy Cows in Full Lactation Monitored over a Six-Month Period

Kinsman, Robert A.; Sauer, Frank; Jackson, H.; Wolynetz, M. S.

doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(95)76907-7

Cited by 127 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the CO 2 /CH 4 ratio in breath gases of 15.5 was much higher than those (CO 2 /CH 4 5 9 to 12) reported previously for dairy cows and measured using the open-circuit indirect respiration technique (Kinsman et al, 1995;Sauer et al, 1998), which suggests an obvious overestimation. Higher estimates of total CO 2 emissions in ruminants with the tracer technique (,120%) than those obtained using open-circuit calorimetry have already been reported (Boadi et al, 2002).…”

Section: Sf 6 Tracer Technique and Ch 4 Emission Estimatescontrasting

confidence: 41%

Effect of release rate of the SF6 tracer on methane emission estimates based on ruminal and breath gas samples

Martin

Koolaard

Rochette

et al. 2012

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The release rate (RR) of sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) gas from permeation tube in the rumen appears to be positively related with methane (CH 4 ) emissions calculated using the SF 6 tracer technique. Gas samples of breath and ruminal headspace were collected simultaneously in order to evaluate the hypothesis that transactions of SF 6 in the rumen are the source for this relationship. Six non-lactating dairy cows fitted with rumen cannulae were subdivided into two groups and randomly assigned to a two-period crossover design to permeation tubes with low RR (LRR 5 1.577 mg/day) or two-times higher RR (HRR 5 3.147 mg/day) RR. The cows were fed limited amounts of maize silage (80% ad libitum) split into two meals (40% at 0800 h and 60% at 1600 h). Each period consisted of 3-day gas sampling. Immediately before the morning feed and then each hour over 8 h, ruminal gas samples (50 ml) were withdrawn through the cannula fitted with stoppers to prevent opening. Simultaneously, 8-h integrated breath gas samples were collected over the same period. Ratios of concentration of CH 4 /SF 6 , CO 2 /SF 6 and CO 2 /CH 4 and emission estimates of CH 4 and CO 2 were calculated for each sample source using the SF 6 tracer technique principles. The LRR treatment yielded higher (P , 0.001) ruminal CH 4 /SF 6 (by 1.79 times) and CO 2 /SF 6 (by 1.90 times) ratios than the HRR treatment; however, these differences were lower than the 2.0 times difference expected from the RR between the LRR and HRR. Consequently, the LRR treatment was associated with lower (P , 0.01) ruminal emissions of CH 4 over the 8-h collection period than with the HRR treatment (111%), a difference also confirmed by the breath samples (111%). RR treatments did not differ (P 5 0.53) in ruminal or breath CO 2 emissions; however, our results confirm that the SF 6 tracer seems inappropriate for CO 2 emissions estimation in ruminants. Irrespective of the RR treatment, breath samples yielded 8% to 9% higher CH 4 emission estimates than the ruminal samples (P 5 0.01). The relationship between rumen and breath sources for CH 4 emissions was better for LRR than for HRR treatment, suggesting that tracer performance decreases with the highest RR of SF 6 tested in our study (3.1 mg/day). A hypothesis is discussed with regard to the mechanism responsible for the relationship between RR and CH 4 emission estimates. The use of permeation tubes with small range in RR is recommended in animal experiments to decrease variability in CH 4 emission estimates using the SF 6 tracer technique.Keywords: SF 6 tracer, permeation rate, methane, breath, ruminal gas ImplicationsThe sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) tracer technique is a method of choice to estimate individual methane (CH 4 ) emissions from large groups of animals under production conditions such as grazing. However, the CH 4 emissions estimates appear related to the SF 6 release rate (RR) in the rumen. This suggests the need to use permeation tubes with a small range in RR in animal experiments, and that the RR is balanced across t...

show abstract

Section: Sf 6 Tracer Technique and Ch 4 Emission Estimatescontrasting

confidence: 41%

Effect of release rate of the SF6 tracer on methane emission estimates based on ruminal and breath gas samples

Martin

Koolaard

Rochette

et al. 2012

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These can be attributed to differences in diet quality and quantities fed, animal body weight, level of milk production and also differences in methods used for estimating CH 4 emissions in each study. The studies of Kinsman et al (1995), Sauer et al (1998) and Kaharabata et al (2000), which were conducted at the same dairy barn with similar animals and feeding regimes, show similar CH 4 emission efficiency values even though a different method of measuring CH 4 was used in the study of Kaharabata et al (2000). There are limited studies on emission estimates of dairy cattle from other milking herds under different farm conditions in Canada.…”

Section: Measurement Of Methane Emission From Dairy Cattlementioning

confidence: 98%

Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review

Boadi¹,

Benchaar²,

Chiquette³

et al. 2004

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

414

296

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2004. Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84: 319-335. Enteric methane (CH 4 ) emission is a major contributor to Canadian greenhouse gas emissions, and also a loss of feed energy during production. The objective of this paper is to provide an update on current management practices and new dietary strategies recently proposed to reduce CH 4 emissions from ruminants. Existing mitigation strategies for dairy, e.g., the addition of ionophores, fats, use of high-quality forages, and increased use of grains, have been well researched and applied. These nutritional changes reduce CH 4 emissions by manipulating ruminal fermentation, directly inhibiting methanogens and protozoa, or by diverting hydrogen ions away from methanogens. Current literature has identified new CH 4 mitigation options. These include the addition of probiotics, acetogens, bacteriocins, archaeal viruses, organic acids, plant extracts (e.g., essential oils) to the diet, as well as immunization, and genetic selection of cows. These new strategies are promising, but more research is needed to validate these approaches and to assess in vivo their effectiveness in reducing CH 4 production by dairy cows. It is also important to evaluate CH 4 mitigation strategies in terms of the total greenhouse gas budget and to consider the cost associated with the various strategies. More basic understanding of the natural differences in digestion efficiencies among animals as well as a better knowledge of methanogens and their interaction with other organisms in the rumen would enable us to exploit the potential of some of the new CH 4 mitigation strategies for dairy cattle production. Key words: Enteric methane, dairy cattle, mitigationBoadi, D., Benchaar, C., Chiquette, J. et Massé, D. 2004. Stratégies visant à réduire les dégagements de méthane entérique des vaches laitières: bilan. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84: 319-335. Le méthane (CH 4 ) d'origine entérique contribue dans une large mesure aux émissions canadiennes de gaz à effet de serre et entraîne une perte de l'énergie tirée des aliments durant la production. Le présent article fait le point sur les pratiques de zootechnie actuelles et sur les stratégies d'engraissement récemment proposées pour réduire les dégagements de CH 4 des ruminants. Les stratégies d'atténuation existantes (addition d'ionophores, matière grasse, utilisation de fourrages de grande qualité, plus grande utilisation de grains) ont fait l'objet de maintes recherches et sont désormais bien appliquées. Les changements nutritionnels qu'elles introduisent diminuent les émissions de CH 4 en modifiant la fermentation dans le rumen, en inhibant directement la production de méthanogènes et la population de protozoaires ainsi qu'en détournant les ions hydrogène des méthanogènes. La documentation scientifique mentionne de nouvelles méthodes pour atténuer la libération de CH 4 . Ces méthodes comprennent l'ajout de probiotiques, d'acétogènes, de bactériocine, de virus archaïques, d'aci...

show abstract

“…Emissions of CO 2 from dairy housing averaged 1989 kg CO 2 hd is per head) [16]. Kinsman et al [17] reported that the mean daily CH 4 emission per dairy cow (602 kg mean bodyweight) in a tie-stall barn ranged from 373 to 617 g CH 4 AU…”

Section: Greenhouse Gas Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ground Level Area Sources in Dairy and Cattle Feedyard Operations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A protocol that consisted of an isolation flux chamber and a portable gas chromatograph was used to directly quantify greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at a dairy and a feedyard operation in the Texas Panhandle. Field sampling campaigns were performed 5 consecutive days only during daylight hours from 9:00 am to 7:00 pm each day. The objective of this research was to quantify and compare GHG emission rates (ERs) from ground level area sources (GLAS) at dairy and cattle feedyard operations during the summer. A total of 74 air samples using flux chamber were collected from the barn (manure lane and bedding area), loafing pen, open lot, settling basin, lagoons, and compost pile within the dairy operation. For the cattle feedyard, a total of 87 air samples were collected from four corner pens of a large feedlot, runoff holding pond, and compost pile. Three primary GHGs (methane, carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide) were measured and quantified from both operations. The aggregate estimated ERs for CH 4 , CO 2 , and N 2 O were 836, 5573, 3.4 g hd(collectively 27.5 kg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e) hd), respectively, at the dairy operation. The aggregate ERs for CH 4 , CO 2 , and N 2 O were 3.8, 1399, 0.68 g hd(1.7 kg CO 2 e hd), respectively, from the feedyard. The estimated USEPA GHG ERs were about 13.2 and 1.16 kg CO 2 e hd, respectively, for dairy and feedyard operations. Aggregate CH 4 , CO 2 and N 2 O ERs at the dairy facility were about 219, 4 and 5 times higher, respectively, than those at the feedyard. OPEN ACCESSAtmosphere 2011, 2 304At the dairy, average CH 4 ERs estimated from the settling basin, primary and secondary lagoons were significantly higher than those from the other GLAS, contributing about 98% of the aggregate CH 4 emission. The runoff holding pond and pen surface of the feedyard contributed about 99% of the aggregate CH 4 emission. Average CO 2 and N 2 O ERs estimated from the pen surface area were significantly higher than those estimated from the compost pile and runoff pond. The pen surface alone contributed about 93% and 84% of the aggregate CO 2 and N 2 O emission, respectively. Abatement and management practices that address GHG emissions from these sources will likely be most effective for reducing facility emissions.

show abstract

Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Dairy Cows in Full Lactation Monitored over a Six-Month Period

Cited by 127 publications

References 9 publications

Effect of release rate of the SF6 tracer on methane emission estimates based on ruminal and breath gas samples

Effect of release rate of the SF6 tracer on methane emission estimates based on ruminal and breath gas samples

Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ground Level Area Sources in Dairy and Cattle Feedyard Operations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About