Literature DB >> 25349366

Evaluation of the laser methane detector to estimate methane emissions from ewes and steers.

P Ricci1, M G G Chagunda2, J Rooke2, J G M Houdijk3, C-A Duthie2, J Hyslop4, R Roehe5, A Waterhouse2.   

Abstract

The laser methane detector (LMD) has been proposed as a method to characterize enteric methane (CH4) emissions from animals in a natural environment. To validate LMD use, its CH4 outputs (LMD-CH4), were compared against CH4 measured with respiration chambers (chamber-CH4). The LMD was used to measure CH4 concentration (µL/L) in the exhaled air of 24 lactating ewes and 72 finishing steers. In ewes, LMD was used on 1 d for each ewe, for 2-min periods at 5 hourly observation periods (P1 to P5, respectively) after feeding. In steers fed either low- or high-concentrate diets, LMD was used once daily for a 4-min period for 3 d. The week after LMD-CH4 measurement, ewes or steers entered respiration chambers to quantify daily CH4 output (g/d). The LMD outputs consisted of periodic events of high CH4 concentrations superimposed on a background of oscillating lower CH4 concentrations. The high CH4 events were attributed to eructation and the lower background CH4 to respiration. After fitting a double normal distribution to the data set, a threshold of 99% of probability of the lower distribution was used to separate respiration from eructation events. The correlation between mean LMD-CH4 and chamber-CH4 was not high, and only improved correlations were observed after data were separated in 2 levels. In ewes, a model with LMD and DMI (adjusted R(2) = 0.92) improved the relationship between DMI and chamber-CH4 alone (adjusted R(2) = 0.79) and between LMD and chamber-CH4 alone (adjusted R(2) = 0.86). In both experiments, chamber-CH4 was best explained by models with length of eructation events (time) and maximum values of CH4 concentration during respiration events (µL/L; P < 0.01). Correlation between methods differed between observation periods, indicating the best results of the LMD were observed from 3 to 5 h after feeding. Given the short time and ease of use of LMD, there is potential for its commercial application and field-based studies. Although good indicators of quantity of CH4 were obtained with respiration and eructation CH4, the method needed to separate the data into high and low levels of CH4 was not simple to apply in practice. Further assessment of the LMD should be performed in relation to animal feeding behavior and physiology to validate assumptions of eructation and respiration levels, and other sources of variation should be tested (i.e., micrometeorology) to better investigate its potential application for CH4 testing in outdoor conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  carbon footprint; cattle; climate change; greenhouse gases; sheep

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25349366     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2014-7676

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


  9 in total

1.  Application of a hand-held laser methane detector for measuring enteric methane emissions from cattle in intensive farming.

Authors:  Kyewon Kang; Hyunjin Cho; Sinyong Jeong; Seoyoung Jeon; Mingyung Lee; Seul Lee; Yulchang Baek; Joonpyo Oh; Seongwon Seo
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 3.338

2.  Measurement Duration but Not Distance, Angle, and Neighbour-Proximity Affects Precision in Enteric Methane Emissions when Using the Laser Methane Detector Technique in Lactating Dairy Cows.

Authors:  Raphaël Boré; Thiphaine Bruder; Mohammed El Jabri; Margaret March; Paul R Hargreaves; Benoît Rouillé; Richard J Dewhurst; Mizeck G G Chagunda
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 3.231

3.  Laser methane detector-based quantification of methane emissions from indoor-fed Fogera dairy cows.

Authors:  Nobuyuki Kobayashi; Fujiang Hou; Atsushi Tsunekawa; Tianhai Yan; Firew Tegegne; Asaminew Tassew; Yeshambel Mekuriaw; Shigdaf Mekuriaw; Beyadglign Hunegnaw; Wondimeneh Mekonnen; Toshiyoshi Ichinohe
Journal:  Anim Biosci       Date:  2021-01-01

Review 4.  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

5.  Bovine Host Genetic Variation Influences Rumen Microbial Methane Production with Best Selection Criterion for Low Methane Emitting and Efficiently Feed Converting Hosts Based on Metagenomic Gene Abundance.

Authors:  Rainer Roehe; Richard J Dewhurst; Carol-Anne Duthie; John A Rooke; Nest McKain; Dave W Ross; Jimmy J Hyslop; Anthony Waterhouse; Tom C Freeman; Mick Watson; R John Wallace
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 5.917

6.  Comparison Between Non-Invasive Methane Measurement Techniques in Cattle.

Authors:  Jagoba Rey; Raquel Atxaerandio; Roberto Ruiz; Eva Ugarte; Oscar González-Recio; Aser Garcia-Rodriguez; Idoia Goiri
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-15       Impact factor: 2.752

7.  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

8.  Assessment of methane emission traits in ewes using a laser methane detector: genetic parameters and impact on lamb weaning performance.

Authors:  Jessica Reintke; Kerstin Brügemann; Tong Yin; Petra Engel; Henrik Wagner; Axel Wehrend; Sven König
Journal:  Arch Anim Breed       Date:  2020-04-16

Review 9.  Quantification of methane emitted by ruminants: a review of methods.

Authors:  Luis Orlindo Tedeschi; Adibe Luiz Abdalla; Clementina Álvarez; Samuel Weniga Anuga; Jacobo Arango; Karen A Beauchemin; Philippe Becquet; Alexandre Berndt; Robert Burns; Camillo De Camillis; Julián Chará; Javier Martin Echazarreta; Mélynda Hassouna; David Kenny; Michael Mathot; Rogerio M Mauricio; Shelby C McClelland; Mutian Niu; Alice Anyango Onyango; Ranjan Parajuli; Luiz Gustavo Ribeiro Pereira; Agustin Del Prado; Maria Paz Tieri; Aimable Uwizeye; Ermias Kebreab
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 3.338

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.