Comparison of methods to determine methane emissions from dairy cows in farm conditions.

Nutritional and animal-selection strategies to mitigate enteric methane (CH4) depend on accurate, cost-effective methods to determine emissions from a large number of animals. The objective of the present study was to compare 2 spot-sampling methods to determine CH4 emissions from dairy cows, using gas quantification equipment installed in concentrate feeders or automatic milking stalls. In the first method (sniffer method), CH4 and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations were measured in close proximity to the muzzle of the animal, and average CH4 concentrations or CH4/CO2 ratio was calculated. In the second method (flux method), measurement of CH4 and CO2 concentration was combined with an active airflow inside the feed troughs for capture of emitted gas and measurements of CH4 and CO2 fluxes. A muzzle sensor was used allowing data to be filtered when the muzzle was not near the sampling inlet. In a laboratory study, a model cow head was built that emitted CO2 at a constant rate. It was found that CO2 concentrations using the sniffer method decreased up to 39% when the distance of the muzzle from the sampling inlet increased to 30cm, but no muzzle-position effects were observed for the flux method. The methods were compared in 2 on-farm studies conducted using 32 (experiment 1) or 59 (experiment 2) cows in a switch-back design of 5 (experiment 1) or 4 (experiment 2) periods for replicated comparisons between methods. Between-cow coefficient of variation (CV) in CH4 was smaller for the flux than the sniffer method (experiment 1, CV=11.0 vs. 17.5%, and experiment 2, 17.6 vs. 28.0%). Repeatability of the measurements from both methods were high (0.72-0.88), but the relationship between the sniffer and flux methods was weak (R(2)=0.09 in both experiments). With the flux method CH4 was found to be correlated to dry matter intake or body weight, but this was not the case with the sniffer method. The CH4/CO2 ratio was more highly correlated between the flux and sniffer methods (R(2)=0.30), and CV was similar (6.4-8.8%). In experiment 2, cow muzzle position was highly repeatable (0.82) and influenced sniffer and flux method results when not filtered for muzzle position. It was concluded that the flux method provides more reliable estimates of CH4 emissions than the sniffer method. The sniffer method appears to be affected by variable air-mixing conditions created by geometry of feed trough, muzzle movement, and muzzle position.