Literature DB >> 22612950

Comparison of the sulfur hexafluoride tracer and respiration chamber techniques for estimating methane emissions and correction for rectum methane output from dairy cows.

C Muñoz1, T Yan, D A Wills, S Murray, A W Gordon.   

Abstract

The objectives of the present study were to compare the sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆) and respiration chamber techniques for measuring methane (CH₄) emissions from dairy cows and to determine the proportion of CH₄ that is released through the rectum. Data used were derived from 20 early lactation dairy cows in a 2 × 2 factorial design study for 4 periods with 6 wk/period. The 4 treatment diets consisted of grass silage and 2 levels of concentrate (30 and 60% dry matter basis), with or without yeast supplement. At the end of each period, CH₄ emissions were measured simultaneously using the SF₆ and respiration chamber techniques when cows were housed in chambers. The SF₆ technique was also used when cows were housed in digestibility units (barn location) before and after respiratory chamber measurements (chamber location). The simultaneous measurements in chamber location revealed that CH₄ emission estimates by the SF₆ technique were similar to those by the respiration chamber technique in the first 3 periods, although the SF₆ estimates were significantly higher in period 4. The regression of all data from the 4 periods demonstrated a linear relationship between the SF₆ and respiration chamber measurements for total CH₄ emissions (g/d, R² = 0.69) and for CH₄ emissions per unit of milk yield (g/kg, R² = 0.88), and a quadratic relationship for CH₄ emissions per unit of dry matter intake (g/kg, R² = 0.64). The CH₄ emissions from the rectum were calculated as the difference between CH₄ estimates from the SF₆ technique when cows were housed in respiratory chambers and barn locations, which was 3% of the total CH₄ emissions from the mouth, nostrils, and rectum. The SF₆ estimates in the chamber location accounted for all sources of emissions, whereas those in the barn location, like that in grazing conditions, did not include CH₄ emission from the rectum. Therefore, the SF₆ measurements for grazing cattle should be adjusted for CH₄ emissions from the rectum (3% of total). We conclude that the SF₆ technique is reasonably accurate for estimating CH₄ emissions.
Copyright © 2012 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22612950     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2011-4298

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  6 in total

1.  Dietary dragon fruit (Hylocereus undatus) peel powder improved in vitro rumen fermentation and gas production kinetics.

Authors:  Maharach Matra; Metha Wanapat; Anusorn Cherdthong; Suban Foiklang; Chaowarit Mapato
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 1.559

2.  Technical note: using an automated head chamber system to administer an external marker to estimate fecal output by grazing beef cattle.

Authors:  Matthew R Beck; Stacey A Gunter; Corey A Moffet; R Ryan Reuter
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 3.338

3.  Comparison of 3 methods for estimating enteric methane and carbon dioxide emission in nonlactating cows.

Authors:  M Doreau; M Arbre; Y Rochette; C Lascoux; M Eugène; C Martin
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-04-14       Impact factor: 3.159

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.  Recent Advances in Measurement and Dietary Mitigation of Enteric Methane Emissions in Ruminants.

Authors:  Amlan K Patra
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2016-05-20

6.  Comparison of Methods to Measure Methane for Use in Genetic Evaluation of Dairy Cattle.

Authors:  Philip C Garnsworthy; Gareth F Difford; Matthew J Bell; Ali R Bayat; Pekka Huhtanen; Björn Kuhla; Jan Lassen; Nico Peiren; Marcin Pszczola; Diana Sorg; Marleen H P W Visker; Tianhai Yan
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 2.752

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.