Literature DB >> 28380597

Optimizing test procedures for estimating daily methane and carbon dioxide emissions in cattle using short-term breath measures.

P F Arthur, I M Barchia, C Weber, T Bird-Gardiner, K A Donoghue, R M Herd, R S Hegarty.   

Abstract

Respiration chambers are considered the reference method for quantifying the daily CH production rate (MPR) and CO production rate (CPR) of cattle; however, they are expensive, labor intensive, cannot be used in the production environment, and can be used to assess only a limited number of animals. Alternative methods are now available, including those that provide multiple short-term measures of CH and CO, such as the GreenFeed Emission Monitoring (GEM) system. This study was conducted to provide information for optimizing test procedures for estimating MPR and CPR of cattle from multiple short-term CH and CO records. Data on 495 Angus steers on a 70-d ad libitum feedlot diet with 46,657 CH and CO records and on 121 Angus heifers on a 15-d ad libitum roughage diet with 7,927 CH and CO records were used. Mean (SD) age and BW were 554 d (SD 92) and 506 kg (SD 73), respectively, for the steers and 372 d (SD 28) and 348 kg (SD 37), respectively, for the heifers. The 2 data sets were analyzed separately but using the same procedures to examine the reduction in variance as more records are added and to evaluate the level of precision with 2 vs. 3 min as the minimum GEM visit duration for a valid record. The moving averages procedure as well as the repeated measures procedure were used to calculate variances for both CH and CO, starting with 5 records and progressively increasing to a maximum of 80 records. For both CH and CO and in both data sets, there was a sharp reduction in the variances obtained by both procedures as more records were added. However, there was no substantial reduction in the variance after 30 records had been added. Inclusion of records with a minimum of 2-min GEM visit duration resulted in reduction in precision relative to a minimum of 3 min, as indicated by significantly ( < 0.05) more heterogeneous variances for all cases except CH4 in steers. In addition, more records were required to achieve the same level of precision relative to data with minimum GEM visit durations of 3 min. For example, in the steers, 72% reduction in initial variance was achieved with 30 records for both CH and CO when minimum GEM visit duration was 3 min, relative to 45 records when data with a minimum visit duration of 2 min were included. It is concluded from this study that when using records of multiple short-term breath measures of CH or CO for the computation of an animal's MPR or CPR, a minimum of 30 records, each record obtained from a minimum GEM visit duration of 3 min, are required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28380597     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2016.0700

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


  7 in total

1.  Genetic variation in residual feed intake is associated with body composition, behavior, rumen, heat production, hematology, and immune competence traits in Angus cattle1.

Authors:  Robert M Herd; Jose I Velazco; Helen Smith; Paul F Arthur; Brad Hine; Hutton Oddy; Robin C Dobos; Roger S Hegarty
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Relationships among carbon dioxide, feed intake, and feed efficiency traits in ad libitum fed beef cattle.

Authors:  Paul F Arthur; Tracie Bird-Gardiner; Idris M Barchia; Kath A Donoghue; Robert M Herd
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Effects of diet on feed intake, weight change, and gas emissions in beef cows.

Authors:  Amanda L Holder; Megan A Gross; Alexandra N Moehlenpah; Carla L Goad; Megan Rolf; Ryon S Walker; James K Rogers; David L Lalman
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-10-01       Impact factor: 3.338

4.  Use of 3-nitrooxypropanol in a commercial feedlot to decrease enteric methane emissions from cattle fed a corn-based finishing diet.

Authors:  Aklilu W Alemu; Adam L Shreck; Calvin W Booker; Sean M McGinn; Liana K D Pekrul; Maik Kindermann; Karen A Beauchemin
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emission of Beef Heifers in Relation with Growth and Feed Efficiency.

Authors:  Gilles Renand; Aurélie Vinet; Virginie Decruyenaere; David Maupetit; Dominique Dozias
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Identification of rumen microbial biomarkers linked to methane emission in Holstein dairy cows.

Authors:  Yuliaxis Ramayo-Caldas; Laura Zingaretti; Milka Popova; Jordi Estellé; Aurelien Bernard; Nicolas Pons; Pau Bellot; Núria Mach; Andrea Rau; Hugo Roume; Miguel Perez-Enciso; Philippe Faverdin; Nadège Edouard; Dusko Ehrlich; Diego P Morgavi; Gilles Renand
Journal:  J Anim Breed Genet       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 2.380

7.  Energy utilization in cattle with steady state and non-steady state methods: the importance of thermal neutrality.

Authors:  A L Schaefer; K Ominski; S Thompson; G Crow; C Bench; J Colyn; A Rodas-Gonzalez; D Maharjan; R Bollum; N J Cook; J Basarab; H von Gaza
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2018-10-05
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.