Literature DB >> 21383032

Enteric methane production and greenhouse gases balance of diets differing in concentrate in the fattening phase of a beef production system.

M Doreau1, H M G van der Werf, D Micol, H Dubroeucq, J Agabriel, Y Rochette, C Martin.   

Abstract

The purposes of this study were 1) to assess the effects of 3 high-concentrate diets on enteric CH(4) production, total tract digestibility, and rumen fermentation of beef cattle, and 2) to evaluate, by life cycle assessment, the potential effects of these feeding systems on the environment. Six bulls (age of 12.4 mo and BW of 417 kg at midexperiment) of the Blond d'Aquitaine breed were assigned to 3 dietary treatments in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design. Diets consisted of 1) 49% natural grassland hay, 41% ground corn grain, and 10% soybean meal (hay); 2) 63% corn silage, 21% ground corn grain, and 16% soybean meal (CS); and 3) 70% ground corn grain, 16% soybean meal, and 14% wheat straw (CG). Daily CH(4) emission (g/d), measured using the sulfur hexafluoride tracer technique, was similar for the hay and CS diets and was 56% greater than for the CG diet (P < 0.001). This difference between diets was maintained when CH(4) output was expressed by unit of feed intake (P < 0.001) or digested feed (P < 0.001). Gross energy intake loss as CH(4) averaged 6.9% for the hay and CS diets and 3.2% for the CG diet (P < 0.001). Organic matter intake and GE intake did not differ between diets. Organic matter digestibility was less for the hay diet than for the CS and CG diets (P=0.008). Digestibility of NDF was greatest for the hay diet, intermediate for the CS diet, and least for the CG diet (P=0.02), with ADF digestibility being similar between the hay and CS diets and greater than for the CG diet (P < 0.001). The rumen pH at 5 h postfeeding was less for animals fed the CG diet compared with those fed the other 2 diets (on average, 5.1 vs. 5.9, respectively; P < 0.001). Total CH(4) emission (enteric + manure) was least for the CG diet, whereas N(2)O and CO(2) emissions were greatest for the CG diet. Total greenhouse gas emissions were least for the CG diet when C sequestration by grasslands was not taken into account.
© 2011 American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21383032     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2010-3140

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  10 in total

1.  Rumen methanogenic genotypes differ in abundance according to host residual feed intake phenotype and diet type.

Authors:  Ciara A Carberry; Sinéad M Waters; Sinead M Waters; David A Kenny; Christopher J Creevey
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Investigation of the microbial metabolism of carbon dioxide and hydrogen in the kangaroo foregut by stable isotope probing.

Authors:  Scott Godwin; Alicia Kang; Lisa-Maree Gulino; Mike Manefield; Maria-Luisa Gutierrez-Zamora; Marco Kienzle; Diane Ouwerkerk; Kerri Dawson; Athol V Klieve
Journal:  ISME J       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 10.302

3.  Carbon Footprints for Food of Animal Origin: What are the Most Preferable Criteria to Measure Animal Yields?

Authors:  Gerhard Flachowsky; Josef Kamphues
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 2.752

4.  Traditional vs modern: role of breed type in determining enteric methane emissions from cattle grazing as part of contrasting grassland-based systems.

Authors:  Mariecia D Fraser; Hannah R Fleming; Jon M Moorby
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Land Use for Edible Protein of Animal Origin-A Review.

Authors:  Gerhard Flachowsky; Ulrich Meyer; Karl-Heinz Südekum
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2017-03-18       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Across-Experiment Transcriptomics of Sheep Rumen Identifies Expression of Lipid/Oxo-Acid Metabolism and Muscle Cell Junction Genes Associated With Variation in Methane-Related Phenotypes.

Authors:  Ruidong Xiang; Jody McNally; Jude Bond; David Tucker; Margaret Cameron; Alistair J Donaldson; Katie L Austin; Suzanne Rowe; Arjan Jonker; Cesar S Pinares-Patino; John C McEwan; Phil E Vercoe; V H Oddy; Brian P Dalrymple
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2018-08-20       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 7.  Phytogenic Additives Can Modulate Rumen Microbiome to Mediate Fermentation Kinetics and Methanogenesis Through Exploiting Diet-Microbe Interaction.

Authors:  Faiz-Ul Hassan; Muhammad Adeel Arshad; Hossam M Ebeid; Muhammad Saif-Ur Rehman; Muhammad Sajjad Khan; Shehryaar Shahid; Chengjian Yang
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2020-11-12

8.  Individual variation and repeatability of methane production from dairy cows estimated by the CO₂ method in automatic milking system.

Authors:  M N Haque; C Cornou; J Madsen
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  LIFE BEEF CARBON: a common framework for quantifying grass and corn based beef farms' carbon footprints.

Authors:  D O'Brien; J Herron; J Andurand; S Caré; P Martinez; L Migliorati; M Moro; G Pirlo; J-B Dollé
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  The Role of Chitosan as a Possible Agent for Enteric Methane Mitigation in Ruminants.

Authors:  Rafael Jiménez-Ocampo; Sara Valencia-Salazar; Carmen Elisa Pinzón-Díaz; Esperanza Herrera-Torres; Carlos Fernando Aguilar-Pérez; Jacobo Arango; Juan Carlos Ku-Vera
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-09       Impact factor: 2.752

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.