Estimates of repeatability and heritability of methane production in sheep using portable accumulation chambers
J. P. Goopy A E , D. L. Robinson B , R. T. Woodgate B , A. J. Donaldson B , V. H. Oddy B , P. E. Vercoe C and R. S. Hegarty DA International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
B Agriculture NSW, Beef Improvement Centre, Trevenna Road, Armidale, NSW, Australia.
C UWA Institute of Agriculture, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
D School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email: j.goopy@cgiar.org
Animal Production Science 56(1) 116-122 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN13370
Submitted: 5 September 2013 Accepted: 3 October 2014 Published: 12 February 2015
Abstract
This study was designed to screen a large number of sheep to identify individuals with high and low methane (CH4) production, and to estimate repeatability and heritability of CH4 emissions in sheep, utilising portable accumulation chambers (PAC) designed for in-field use. Mature ewes (n = 710) selected from a research flock with known sires had their CH4 production over 1 h measured in PAC [CH4 (g1h)]. Individuals with High (n = 103) or Low (n = 104) CH4 (g1h), adjusted for liveweight (LW), were selected and re-measured on three occasions 1–4 months later, at another site with more abundant and better quality pasture. Mean of the selected (207) ewes CH4 (g1h) emissions were ~50% higher than at the first measurement site (0.66 g vs 0.42 g). LW was a significant correlate of CH4 production (r = 0.47). Correlations between CH4 (g1h) for the three PAC measurements at Site 2, before adjusting for LW ranged from 0.44 to 0.55. After adjusting for the effect of LW, repeatability was 0.33 at the first and 0.43 at the second site. The correlation between estimates of an animal’s emissions at the first and second sites, adjusted for LW, was 0.24. Initial CH4 production of the selected High group was 32% greater than the Low group (P < 0.0001). On re-measurement there was still a significant difference (9–15%, P < 0.006) between Low and High groups. The initial estimate of heritability of CH4 (g1h), based on variation between the ewes’ sires (0.13), was not maintained across the two sites. This may be due to genotype × environment interactions. We postulate that aspects of rumen physiology, which modulate CH4 production, could be expressed differently in different nutritional environments. Our results indicate that field use of PAC to screen sheep populations for CH4 production is both robust and repeatable. However, further investigations are required into the relationship between CH4 output of individual animals in PAC compared with the more controlled conditions in respiration chambers.
Additional keywords: enteric methane, heritability, measurement, sheep.
References
Bickell SL, Toovey A, Robinson DL, Goopy JP, Hegarty RS, Revell DK, Vercoe PE (2011) Four week repeatability of daily methane production of mature merino wethers fed ad-libitum. In ‘Proceedings of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 19 July 2011, Perth, WA’. 19, pp. 415–418. (AAABG: Armidale, NSW)Blaxter KL, Clapperton JL (1965) Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants. The British Journal of Nutrition 19, 511–522.
| Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaF28XitFKktg%3D%3D&md5=2a0b9f2ba383587ab81bcf6489c6b257CAS | 5852118PubMed |
Buddle BM, Denis M, Attwood GT, Altermann E, Jansen PH, Ronimus RS, Pinares-Patiño CS, Muetzel S, Wedlock DN (2011) Strategies to reduce methane emissions from farmed ruminants grazing on pasture. Veterinary Journal (London, England) 188, 11–17.
| Strategies to reduce methane emissions from farmed ruminants grazing on pasture.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXjs1Sgt7k%3D&md5=18fdc4698a72394fec8ee2533fb136a5CAS |
Butler DG, Tan MK, Cullis BR (2009) Improving the accuracy of selection for late maturity α-amylase in wheat using multi-phase designs. Crop and Pasture Science 60, 1202–1208.
| Improving the accuracy of selection for late maturity α-amylase in wheat using multi-phase designs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXhsVKhtL%2FL&md5=ea31f020fdde2cbcc3dc092fb3d5d794CAS |
Gerber P, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, Mottet A, Opio C, Dijkman J, Falcucci A, Tempio G (2013) ‘Tackling climate change through livestock: a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities.’ (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome)
Gill M, Smith P, Wilkinson JM (2010) Mitigating climate change: the role of domestic livestock. Animal 4, 323–333.
| Mitigating climate change: the role of domestic livestock.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC38vptFaisA%3D%3D&md5=c3920c7b6370bb21954acb7571c4ec33CAS | 22443938PubMed |
Goopy JP, Hegarty RS, Dobos RC (2006) The persistence over time of divergent methane production lot-fed cattle. International Congress Series 1293, 111–114.
| The persistence over time of divergent methane production lot-fed cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhs1amsbo%3D&md5=9a84b051abd4d8706ba743ca750cec7cCAS |
Goopy JP, Hegarty RS, Robinson DL (2009) Two hour Chamber measurement provides useful estimate of daily methane production in sheep. In ‘Ruminant physiology: digestion, metabolism, and effects of nutrition on reproduction and welfare’. (Eds Y Chilliard, F Glasser, Y Faulconnier, F Bocquier, I Veissier, M Doreau) pp. 190–191. (Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen)
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. The British Journal of Nutrition 111, 578–585.
Iqbal MF, Cheng Y, Zhu W, Zeshan B (2008) Mitigation of ruminant methane production: current strategies, constraints and future options. World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology 24, 2747–2755.
| Mitigation of ruminant methane production: current strategies, constraints and future options.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXht1OksLnE&md5=e0f2538cee916fdf2bedf1655fa28e30CAS |
Münger RA, Kreuzer M (2008) Absence of persistent methane emission differences in three breeds of dairy cows. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48, 77–82.
| Absence of persistent methane emission differences in three breeds of dairy cows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pinares-Patiño CS, Ulyatt MJ, Lassey KR, Barry NT, Holmes CW (2003) Persistence of differences between sheep in methane emission under generous grazing. The Journal of Agricultural Science 140, 227–233.
| Persistence of differences between sheep in methane emission under generous grazing.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pinares-Patiño CS, McEwan JC, Dodds KG, Cardenas EA, Hegarty RS, Koolard JP, Clark H (2011) Repeatability of methane emissions from sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166-167, 210–218.
| Repeatability of methane emissions from sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pleasants AB, Oddy VH (1998) The dynamics of food intake in sheep. In ‘Proceedings of Symposium on Managing Intake in Grazing Ruminants, 18 March 1998, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand’. pp. 23–25.
Pollott G, Karlsson L, Eady S, Greeff J (2004) Genetic parameters for indicators of host resistance to parasites from weaning to hogget age in Merino sheep. Journal of Animal Science 82, 2852–2864.
Purser DB, Moir RJ (1966) Rumen volume as a factor involved in individual sheep differences. Journal of Animal Science 25, 509–515.
Robinson DL, Goopy JP, Hegarty RS, Vercoe PE (2010) Repeatability, animal and sire variation in 1-hr methane emissions and relationships with rumen volatile fatty acid concentrations. World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock production. Available at http://www.kongressband.de/wcgalp2010/assets/html/0712.htm [Verified 29 May 2012]
Robinson DL, Goopy JP, Donaldson A, Woodgate RW, Oddy VH, Hegarty RS (2014) Sire and liveweight affect feed intake and methane emissions of sheep confined in respiration chambers. Animal 8, 1935–1944.
| Sire and liveweight affect feed intake and methane emissions of sheep confined in respiration chambers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC2MXlvFCksw%3D%3D&md5=671cc81a2e42869e486b2869574dd04dCAS | 25404195PubMed |
Stewart WE, Stewart DG, Schultz LH (1958) Rates of volatile fatty acid production in the bovine rumen. Journal of Animal Science 17, 723–736.
Ulyatt MJ, Baker SK, McCrabb GJ, Lassey KR (1999) Accuracy of SF6 tracer technology and alternatives for field measurements. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 50, 1329–1334.
| Accuracy of SF6 tracer technology and alternatives for field measurements.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
White JD, Allingham PG, Gorman CM, Emery D, Hynd P, Owens J, Bell A, Siddel J, Hayes B, Usmar J, Goddard M, Henshall J, Dominik S, Brewer H, Van der Werf J, Nicholas FJ, Warner R, Hofmyer C, Longhurst T, Swan P, Forage R, Oddy VH (2012) Design and phenotyping procedures for recording wool, skin, parasite resistance, growth, carcass yield and quality traits of the SheepGENOMICS mapping flock. Animal Production Science 52, 157–171.
| Design and phenotyping procedures for recording wool, skin, parasite resistance, growth, carcass yield and quality traits of the SheepGENOMICS mapping flock.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
