Variation in enteric methane emissions among cows on commercial dairy farms

Bell, Matthew; Potterton, Sarah; Craigon, J.; Saunders, Neil F. W.; Wilcox, R. H.; Hunter, Michael; Goodman, John C.; Garnsworthy, P. C.

doi:10.1017/s1751731114001530

Cited by 51 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies [18,21] have identified important explanatory variables describing CH 4 emissions per individual cow as being time of year, stage of lactation, time of day, and effect of farm. The following model was used to describe emissions from individual cows with the inclusion of explanatory variables for feeding system effects:…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To do this, a fixed volume (2.7 L) of 1.0% CH 4 in nitrogen was released at two locations in the feed bin of the milking station, which were at the base of the trough and at the centre of the feed bin level with the sample tube. Release of CH 4 was replicated three times at each location, with the dilution factor being the mean ratio of six values of CH 4 concentrations in released and sampled gas [18]. Concentration of CH 4 in the air sampled followed a pattern of peaks and troughs demonstrating that a pulse release of CH 4 was eructated by the cow.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The current study builds on the research of Bell et al [18], who found considerable unexplained variation in CH 4 emissions among farms that warranted further investigation with the addition of diet composition and feed intake data, which are known to explain a large proportion of variation in emissions [19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of Feeding System on Enteric Methane Emissions from Individual Dairy Cows on Commercial Farms

Eckert

Bell

Potterton

et al. 2018

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the effects of feeding system on diurnal enteric methane (CH 4 ) emissions from individual cows on commercial farms. Data were obtained from 830 cows across 12 farms, and data collated included production records, CH 4 measurements (in the breath of cows using CH 4 analysers at robotic milking stations for at least seven days) and diet composition. Cows received either a partial mixed ration (PMR) or a PMR with grazing. A linear mixed model was used to describe variation in CH 4 emissions per individual cow and assess the effect of feeding system. Methane emissions followed a consistent diurnal pattern across both feeding systems, with emissions lowest between 05:00 and 08:59, and with a peak concentration between 17:00 and 20:59. No overall difference in emissions was found between feeding systems studied; however, differences were found in the diurnal pattern of CH 4 emissions between feeding systems. The response in emissions to increasing dry matter intake was higher for cows fed PMR with grazing. This study showed that repeated spot measurements of CH 4 emissions whilst cows are milked can be used to assess the effects of feeding system and potentially benchmark farms on level of emissions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Feeding System on Enteric Methane Emissions from Individual Dairy Cows on Commercial Farms

Eckert

Bell

Potterton

et al. 2018

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is evidence indicating that daily CH 4 emission rates (g/day) of dairy cows varied considerably during lactation, but followed the variation curves of feed intake and milk production (Garnsworthy et al, 2012). Daily CH 4 emission rates also vary among cows on commercial farms (Bell et al, 2014). Therefore, further studies designed specially to compare the production capacity, rumen ecology and methanogenesis in dairy cows with different genetic merits (PIN or PLI) may be required to validate the results obtained in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a relationship between genetic merit and enteric methane emission rate of lactating Holstein-Friesian dairy cows?

Dong

Yan

Ferris

et al. 2015

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study was undertaken to examine the effect of cow genetic merit on enteric methane (CH 4 ) emission rate. The study used a data set from 32 respiration calorimeter studies undertaken at this Institute between 1992 and 2010, with all studies involving lactating Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. Cow genetic merit was defined as either profit index (PIN) or profitable lifetime index (PLI), with these two United Kingdom genetic indexes expressing the expected improvement in profit associated with an individual cow, compared with the population average. While PIN is based solely on milk production, PLI includes milk production and a number of other functional traits including health, fertility and longevity. The data set had a large range in PIN (n = 736 records, −£30 to +£63) and PLI (n = 548 records, −£131 to +£184), days in milk (18 to 354), energy corrected milk yield (16.0 to 45.6 kg/day) and CH 4 emission (138 to 598 g/day). The effect of cow genetic merit (PIN or PLI) was evaluated using ANOVA and linear mixed modelling techniques after removing the effects of a number of animal and diet factors. The ANOVA was undertaken by dividing each data set of PIN and PLI into three sub-groups (PIN: <£3, £3 to £15 and >£15, PLI: <£23, £23 to £67 and >£67) with these being categorised as low, medium and high genetic merit. Within the PIN and PLI data sets there was no significant differences among the three sub-groups in terms of CH 4 emission per kg feed intake or per kg energy corrected milk yield, or CH 4 energy (CH 4 -E) output as a proportion of energy intake. Linear regression using the whole PIN and PLI data sets also demonstrated that there was no significant relationship between either PIN or PLI, and CH 4 emission per kg of feed intake or CH 4 -E output as a proportion of energy intake. These results indicate that cow genetic merit (PIN or PLI) has little effect on enteric CH 4 emissions as a proportion of feed intake. Instead enteric CH 4 production may mainly relate to total feed intake and dietary nutrient composition.

show abstract

“…In this context, one challenge is to propose both feeding and breeding practices that can reduce methane emissions while competing less with human food (Dumont et al, 2014). Part of the solution lies in the genetic variability of methane emissions that has been evidenced in cattle (Bell et al, 2014) and sheep (Pinares-Patiño et al, 2013). Lower methane emissions could be achieved through indirect selection on correlated traits such as residual feed intake; reductions in methane emissions per cow of around 11% to 26% within 10 years are thus theoretically possible by selecting more efficient cows de Haas et al, 2011).…”

Section: Sparing Natural Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review: Towards the agroecological management of ruminants, pigs and poultry through the development of sustainable breeding programmes: I-selection goals and criteria

Phocas

Belloc

Bidanel

et al. 2016

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agroecology uses natural processes and local resources rather than chemical inputs to ensure production while limiting the environmental footprint of livestock and crop production systems. Selecting to achieve a maximization of target production criteria has long proved detrimental to fitness traits. However, since the 1990s, developments in animal breeding have also focussed on animal robustness by balancing production and functional traits within overall breeding goals. We discuss here how an agroecological perspective should further shift breeding goals towards functional traits rather than production traits. Breeding for robustness aims to promote individual adaptive capacities by considering diverse selection criteria which include reproduction, animal health and welfare, and adaptation to rough feed resources, a warm climate or fluctuating environmental conditions. It requires the consideration of genotype × environment interactions in the prediction of breeding values. Animal performance must be evaluated in low-input systems in order to select those animals that are adapted to limiting conditions, including feed and water availability, climate variations and diseases. Finally, we argue that there is no single agroecological animal type, but animals with a variety of profiles that can meet the expectations of agroecology. The standardization of both animals and breeding conditions indeed appears contradictory to the agroecological paradigm that calls for an adaptation of animals to local opportunities and constraints in weakly artificialized systems tied to their physical environment.

show abstract

Variation in enteric methane emissions among cows on commercial dairy farms

Cited by 51 publications

References 18 publications

Effect of Feeding System on Enteric Methane Emissions from Individual Dairy Cows on Commercial Farms

Effect of Feeding System on Enteric Methane Emissions from Individual Dairy Cows on Commercial Farms

Is there a relationship between genetic merit and enteric methane emission rate of lactating Holstein-Friesian dairy cows?

Review: Towards the agroecological management of ruminants, pigs and poultry through the development of sustainable breeding programmes: I-selection goals and criteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About