Genetic parameters for methane emissions in Australian sheep measured in portable accumulation chambers in grazing and controlled environments
P. K. Wahinya
A * , V. H. Oddy B C , S. Dominik B D , D. J. Brown A , C. A. Macleay E , B. Paganoni E , A. N. Thompson F , A. J. Donaldson C , K. Austin C , M. Cameron C and J. H. J. van der Werf B
A Animal Genetics & Breeding Unit, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
B School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
C NSW Department of Primary Industries, Livestock Industries Centre, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
D CSIRO Agriculture and Food, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia.
E Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, 1 Verschuer Place, Bunbury, WA 6230, Australia.
F Centre for Animal Production and Health, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia.
Animal Production Science 62(9) 818-827 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN21270
Submitted: 17 May 2021 Accepted: 11 February 2022 Published: 10 March 2022
© 2022 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)
Abstract
Context: Genotype by environment interaction or sire re-ranking between measurements of methane emission in different environments or from using different measurement protocols can affect the efficiency of selection strategies to abate methane emission.
Aim: This study tested the hypothesis that measurements of methane emission from grazing sheep under field conditions, where the feed intake is unknown, are genetically correlated to measurements in a controlled environment where feed intake is known.
Methods: Data on emission of methane and carbon dioxide and uptake of oxygen were measured using portable accumulation chambers from 499 animals in a controlled environment in New South Wales and 1382 animals in a grazing environment in Western Australia were analysed. Genetic linkage between both environments was provided by 140 sires with progeny in both environments. Multi-variate animal models were used to estimate genetic parameters for the three gas traits corrected for liveweight. Genetic groups were fitted in the models to account for breed differences. Genetic correlations between the field and controlled environments for the three traits were estimated using bivariate models.
Key results: Animals in the controlled environment had higher methane emission compared to the animals in the field environment (37.0 ± s.d 9.3 and 35.3 ± s.d 9.4 for two protocols vs 12.9 ± s.d 5.1 and 14.6 ± s.d 4.8 mL/min for lambs and ewes (±s.d); P < 0.05) but carbon dioxide emission and oxygen uptake did not significantly differ. The heritability estimates for methane emission, carbon dioxide emission and oxygen uptake were 0.15, 0.06 and 0.11 for the controlled environment and 0.17, 0.27 and 0.35 for the field environment. The repeatability for the traits in the controlled environment ranged from 0.51 to 0.59 and from 0.24 to 0.38 in the field environment. Genetic correlations were high (0.85–0.99) but with high standard errors.
Conclusion: Methane emission phenotypes measured using portable accumulation chambers in grazing sheep can be used in genetic evaluation to estimate breeding values for genetic improvement of emission related traits. The combined measurement protocol-environment did not lead to re-ranking of sires.
Implication: These results suggest that both phenotypes could be used in selection for reduced methane emission in grazing sheep. However, this needs to be consolidated using a larger number of animals and sires with larger progeny groups in different environments.
Keywords: enteric emission, feed intake, grazing environment, heritability, measurement of methane emission, portable accumulation chamber, sheep, repeatability.
References
Alcock DJ, Hegarty RS (2011) Potential effects of animal management and genetic improvement on enteric methane emissions, emissions intensity and productivity of sheep enterprises at Cowra, Australia. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166–167, 749–760.| Potential effects of animal management and genetic improvement on enteric methane emissions, emissions intensity and productivity of sheep enterprises at Cowra, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Arthur PF, Bird-Gardiner T, Barchia IM, Donoghue KA, Herd RM (2018) Relationships among carbon dioxide, feed intake, and feed efficiency traits in ad libitum fed beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 96, 4859–4867.
| Relationships among carbon dioxide, feed intake, and feed efficiency traits in ad libitum fed beef cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30060045PubMed |
Blaxter KL, Clapperton JL (1965) Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants. British Journal of Nutrition 19, 511–522.
| Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bond JJ, Cameron M, Donaldson AJ, Austin KL, Harden S, Robinson DL, Oddy VH (2019) Aspects of digestive function in sheep related to phenotypic variation in methane emissions. Animal Production Science 59, 55
| Aspects of digestive function in sheep related to phenotypic variation in methane emissions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Boucher O, Friedlingstein P, Collins B, Shine KP (2009) The indirect global warming potential and global temperature change potential due to methane oxidation. Environmental Research Letters 4, 044007
| The indirect global warming potential and global temperature change potential due to methane oxidation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Browne NA, Eckard RJ, Behrendt R, Kingwell RS (2011) A comparative analysis of on-farm greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural enterprises in south eastern Australia. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166–167, 641–652.
| A comparative analysis of on-farm greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural enterprises in south eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Department of the Environment and Energy (2019) Australia’s emissions projections 2019, Commonwealth of Australia 2019. Available at https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-07/australias-emissions-projections-2019-report.pdf
Dominik S, Oddy V (2015) Repeatabilities for methane emissions in Merino ewes on pasture across different ages. In ‘Proceedings of the 21st conference of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics (AAABG), 28–30 September 2015, Lorne, Victoria, Australia’. vol. 21, pp. 110–113
Dominik S, Robinson D, Donaldson A, Cameron M, Austin K, Oddy V (2017) Relationship between feed intake, energy expenditure and methane emissions: implications for genetic evaluation. In ‘Proceedings of the 22nd conference of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics (AAABG), 2–5 July 2017, Townsville, Queensland, Australia’. pp. 65–68
Eckard RJ, Grainger C, de Klein CAM (2010) Options for the abatement of methane and nitrous oxide from ruminant production: a review. Livestock Science 130, 47–56.
| Options for the abatement of methane and nitrous oxide from ruminant production: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gilmour A, Gogel B, Cullis B, Welham S, Thompson R (2015) ‘ASReml user guide release 4.1 structural specification’. (VSN international ltd: Hemel Hempstead)
Goopy JP, Woodgate R, Donaldson A, Robinson DL, Hegarty RS (2011) Validation of a short-term methane measurement using portable static chambers to estimate daily methane production in sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166-167, 219–226.
| Validation of a short-term methane measurement using portable static chambers to estimate daily methane production in sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Goopy JP, Donaldson A, Hegarty R, Vercoe PE, Haynes F, Barnett M, Oddy VH (2014) Low-methane yield sheep have smaller rumens and shorter rumen retention time. British Journal of Nutrition 111, 578–585.
| Low-methane yield sheep have smaller rumens and shorter rumen retention time.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Goopy JP, Robinson DL, Woodgate RT, Donaldson AJ, Oddy VH, Vercoe PE, Hegarty RS (2016) Estimates of repeatability and heritability of methane production in sheep using portable accumulation chambers. Animal Production Science 56, 116–122.
| Estimates of repeatability and heritability of methane production in sheep using portable accumulation chambers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Herd RM, Velazco JI, Arthur PF, Hegarty RS (2016) Proxies to adjust methane production rate of beef cattle when the quantity of feed consumed is unknown. Animal Production Science 56, 231–237.
| Proxies to adjust methane production rate of beef cattle when the quantity of feed consumed is unknown.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jonker A, Hickey SM, Rowe SJ, Janssen PH, Shackell GH, Elmes S, Bain WE, Wing J, Greer GJ, Bryson B, Maclean S, Dodds KG, Pinares-Patiño CS, Young EA, Knowler K, Pickering NK, McEwan JC (2018) Genetic parameters of methane emissions determined using portable accumulation chambers in lambs and ewes grazing pasture and genetic correlations with emissions determined in respiration chambers. Journal of Animal Science 96, 3031–3042.
| Genetic parameters of methane emissions determined using portable accumulation chambers in lambs and ewes grazing pasture and genetic correlations with emissions determined in respiration chambers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29741677PubMed |
Llonch P, Troy SM, Duthie C-A, Somarriba M, Rooke J, Haskell MJ, Roehe R, Turner SP (2016) Changes in feed intake during isolation stress in respiration chambers may impact methane emissions assessment. Animal Production Science 58, 1011–1016.
| Changes in feed intake during isolation stress in respiration chambers may impact methane emissions assessment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
O’Connor E, McGovern FM, Byrne DT, Boland TM, Dunne E, McHugh N (2021) Repeatability of gaseous measurements across consecutive days in sheep using portable accumulation chambers. Journal of Animal Science 99, skab288
| Repeatability of gaseous measurements across consecutive days in sheep using portable accumulation chambers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34637520PubMed |
Oddy VH, Donaldson AJ, Cameron M, Bond J, Dominik S, Robinson DL (2019) Variation in methane production over time and physiological state in sheep. Animal Production Science 59, 441–448.
| Variation in methane production over time and physiological state in sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Paganoni B, Rose G, Macleay C, Jones C, Brown DJ, Kearney G, Ferguson M, Thompson AN (2017) More feed efficient sheep produce less methane and carbon dioxide when eating high-quality pellets. Journal of Animal Science 95, 3839–3850.
| More feed efficient sheep produce less methane and carbon dioxide when eating high-quality pellets.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28992015PubMed |
Pinares-Patiño CS, Ulyatt MJ, Lassey KR, Barry TN, Holmes CW (2003) Persistence of differences between sheep in methane emission under generous grazing conditions. The Journal of Agricultural Science 140, 227–233.
| Persistence of differences between sheep in methane emission under generous grazing conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pinares-Patiño CS, Hickey SM, Young EA, Dodds KG, Maclean S, Molano G, Sandoval E, Kjestrup H, Harland R, Hunt C, Pickering NK, McEwan JC (2013) Heritability estimates of methane emissions from sheep. Animal 7, 316–321.
| Heritability estimates of methane emissions from sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23739473PubMed |
Renand G, Vinet A, Decruyenaere V, Maupetit D, Dozias D (2019) Methane and carbon dioxide emission of beef heifers in relation with growth and feed efficiency. Animals 9, 1136
| Methane and carbon dioxide emission of beef heifers in relation with growth and feed efficiency.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Robinson DL, Goopy JP, Hegarty RS, Oddy VH, Thompson AN, Toovey AF, Macleay CA, Briegal JR, Woodgate RT, Donaldson AJ, Vercoe PE (2014) Genetic and environmental variation in methane emissions of sheep at pasture. Journal of Animal Science 92, 4349–4363.
| Genetic and environmental variation in methane emissions of sheep at pasture.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25149329PubMed |
Robinson DL, Goopy JP, Hegarty RS, Oddy VH (2015) Comparison of repeated measurements of methane production in sheep over 5 years and a range of measurement protocols. Journal of Animal Science 93, 4637–4650.
| Comparison of repeated measurements of methane production in sheep over 5 years and a range of measurement protocols.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26523556PubMed |
Robinson DL, Dominik S, Donaldson AJ, Oddy VH (2020) Repeatabilities, heritabilities and correlations of methane and feed intake of sheep in respiration and portable chambers. Animal Production Science 60, 880–892.
| Repeatabilities, heritabilities and correlations of methane and feed intake of sheep in respiration and portable chambers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rowe S, Hickey S, Jonker A, Hess M, Janssen P, Johnson P, Bryson B, Knowler K, Pinares-Patino C, Bain W (2019) Selection for divergent methane yield in New Zealand sheep: a ten-year perspective. In ‘Proceedings of the 23rd conference of the Association of Advancement in Animal Breeding and Genetics (AAABG), 27 October–1 November 2019, Armidale, Australia’. vol 23, pp. 306–309
Smith P, Martino D, Cai Z, Gwary D, Janzen H, Kumar P, McCarl B, Ogle S, O’Mara F, Rice C, Scholes B, Sirotenko O, Howden M, McAllister T, Pan G, Romanenkov V, Schneider U, Towprayoon S, Wattenbach M, Smith J (2008) Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363, 789–813.
| Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
van der Werf JHJ, Kinghorn BP, Banks RG (2010) Design and role of an information nucleus in sheep breeding programs. Animal Production Science 50, 998–1003.
| Design and role of an information nucleus in sheep breeding programs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
