Literature DB >> 21547374

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

Amlan Kumar Patra1.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21547374     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-011-2090-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  66 in total

1.  Reponses of sheep to a vaccination of entodinial or mixed rumen protozoal antigens to reduce rumen protozoal numbers.

Authors:  Yvette J Williams; Suzanne M Rea; Sam Popovski; Carolyn L Pimm; Andrew J Williams; Andrew F Toovey; Lucy C Skillman; André-Denis G Wright
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 3.718

2.  Effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture and Saccharomyces cerevisiae live cells on in vitro mixed ruminal microorganism fermentation.

Authors:  H A Lynch; S A Martin
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  Some rumen ciliates have endosymbiotic methanogens.

Authors:  B J Finlay; G Esteban; K J Clarke; A G Williams; T M Embley; R P Hirt
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  1994-04-01       Impact factor: 2.742

4.  Development of a vaccine to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture: vaccination of sheep with methanogen fractions induces antibodies that block methane production in vitro.

Authors:  D N Wedlock; G Pedersen; M Denis; D Dey; P H Janssen; B M Buddle
Journal:  N Z Vet J       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.628

5.  The effect of a condensed tannin-containing forage on methane emission by goats.

Authors:  R Puchala; B R Min; A L Goetsch; T Sahlu
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  The genome sequence of the rumen methanogen Methanobrevibacter ruminantium reveals new possibilities for controlling ruminant methane emissions.

Authors:  Sinead C Leahy; William J Kelly; Eric Altermann; Ron S Ronimus; Carl J Yeoman; Diana M Pacheco; Dong Li; Zhanhao Kong; Sharla McTavish; Carrie Sang; Suzanne C Lambie; Peter H Janssen; Debjit Dey; Graeme T Attwood
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Evidence of increased diversity of methanogenic archaea with plant extract supplementation.

Authors:  S Ohene-Adjei; A V Chaves; T A McAllister; C Benchaar; R M Teather; R J Forster
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2007-12-13       Impact factor: 4.552

8.  In vitro H2 utilization by a ruminal acetogenic bacterium cultivated alone or in association with an archaea methanogen is stimulated by a probiotic strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  F Chaucheyras; G Fonty; G Bertin; P Gouet
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.792

9.  Methane output and diet digestibility in response to feeding dairy cows crude linseed, extruded linseed, or linseed oil.

Authors:  C Martin; J Rouel; J P Jouany; M Doreau; Y Chilliard
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2008-05-09       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Methane emissions from cattle.

Authors:  K A Johnson; D E Johnson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 3.159

View more
  25 in total

1.  Corn oil supplementation enhances hydrogen use for biohydrogenation, inhibits methanogenesis, and alters fermentation pathways and the microbial community in the rumen of goats.

Authors:  Xiu Min Zhang; Rodolfo F Medrano; Min Wang; Karen A Beauchemin; Zhi Yuan Ma; Rong Wang; Jiang Nan Wen; Bernard A Lukuyu; Zhi Liang Tan; Jian Hua He
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Methane emissions from river buffaloes fed on green fodders in relation to the nutrient [corrected] intake and digestibility.

Authors:  Sonali Prusty; Madhu Mohini; Shivlal Singh Kundu; Ajay Kumar; Chander Datt
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 1.559

3.  Effects of essential oils on methane production and fermentation by, and abundance and diversity of, rumen microbial populations.

Authors:  Amlan K Patra; Zhongtang Yu
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-04-06       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 4.  Bovicins: The Bacteriocins of Streptococci and Their Potential in Methane Mitigation.

Authors:  Anita Kumari Garsa; Prasanta Kumar Choudhury; Anil Kumar Puniya; Tejpal Dhewa; Ravinder Kumar Malik; Sudhir Kumar Tomar
Journal:  Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 4.609

5.  Methylotrophic methanogenic Thermoplasmata implicated in reduced methane emissions from bovine rumen.

Authors:  Morten Poulsen; Clarissa Schwab; Bent Borg Jensen; Ricarda M Engberg; Anja Spang; Nuria Canibe; Ole Højberg; Gabriel Milinovich; Lena Fragner; Christa Schleper; Wolfram Weckwerth; Peter Lund; Andreas Schramm; Tim Urich
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 14.919

6.  Rumen fermentation and acetogen population changes in response to an exogenous acetogen TWA4 strain and Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product.

Authors:  Chun-lei Yang; Le-luo Guan; Jian-xin Liu; Jia-kun Wang
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.066

7.  Trends and Projected Estimates of GHG Emissions from Indian Livestock in Comparisons with GHG Emissions from World and Developing Countries.

Authors:  Amlan Kumar Patra
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.509

8.  Immunization against Rumen Methanogenesis by Vaccination with a New Recombinant Protein.

Authors:  Litai Zhang; Xiaofeng Huang; Bai Xue; Quanhui Peng; Zhisheng Wang; Tianhai Yan; Lizhi Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Effects of marine and freshwater macroalgae on in vitro total gas and methane production.

Authors:  Lorenna Machado; Marie Magnusson; Nicholas A Paul; Rocky de Nys; Nigel Tomkins
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Metagenomics of rumen bacteriophage from thirteen lactating dairy cattle.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Ross; Steve Petrovski; Peter J Moate; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  BMC Microbiol       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 3.605

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.